, • • ’ ^ , • 

: '■'''§  'v, ' V. 


“ COiVlfMISSION  ON  BUILDING 

■ 'i  rV<^  " " ■ ‘ . r 

DISTRICTS  AND  RESTRICTIONS 


I;-' ' 


FINAL  REPORT 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING 
DISTRICTS  AND  RESTRICTIONS 

FINAL  REPORT 

JUNE  2,  1916 

The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 


BUILDING 

ESTRICTIONS 

-ORT 


SUPPLEMENTARY  EDITION  ^ 

THE  CITY  CLUB  OF  NEW  YORK 

55  WEST  44th  STREET 


CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

BOARD  OF  ESTIMATE  AND  APPORTIONMENT 
COMMITTEE  ON  THE  CITY  PLAN 
1910 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS  AND  RESTRICTIONS 


Edward  M.  Bassett^  Chairman 
Lawson  Purdy,  Vice-Chairman 


Edwaiud  C.  Blum 
James  E.  Clonin 
Otto  M.  Eidlitz 
Burt  L.  Fenner 


Alfred  E.  Marling 
George  T.  Mortimer 
J.  F.  Smith 


Walter  Stabler 


Edwaih)  R.  Hardy 
Richard  W.  Lawrence 
Alrick  H.  Man 


Franklin  S.  Tomlin 
George  C.  Whipple 
William  G.  Willcox 


Robert  H.  Whitten,  Secretary 


COMMITTEES 


Borough  of  Manhattan — Walter  Stabler,  Chairman;  Otto  M.  Eidlitz, 
Alfred  E.  Marling,  George  T.  Mortimer. 

Borough  of  The  Bronx — Richard  W.  Lawrence,  Chairman;  Edward  R._ 
Hardy,  Alfred  E.  Marling. 

Borough  of  Brooklyn — Franklin  S.  Tomlin,  Chairman;  Edward  C. 
Blum,  Lawson  Purdy. 

Borough  of  Queens — Alrick  H.  Man,  Chairman;  James  E.  Clonin, 
Burt  L.  Fenner. 

Borough  of  Richmond — William  G.  Willcox,  Chairman;  J.  F.  Smith, 
George  C.  Whipple. 


Robert  H.  Whitten,  Secretary 
George  B.  Ford,  Consultant 
John  P.  Fox,  Transit  Expert 
Herbert  S.  Swan,  Investigator 
George  W.  Tuttle,  Assistant  Engineer 
Edward  M.  Law,  Assistant  Engineer 


STAFF 


GH-.V:' 


CONTENTS 

Page 

Chapter  I — Introduction 5 

Chapter  II — Necessity  for  Comprehensive  Plan  of  Building  Control. . 9 

Chapter  III — Use  Districts 19 

Chapter  IV — Appropriate  Intensity  of  the  Use  of  Land 29 

Chapter  V — Heights  Districts 36 

Chapter  VI — Area  Districts  42 

Chapter  VII — Future  Change  and  Development  of  Districting  Plan..  46 

Appendix  I — Charter  Provisions  49 

Appendix  II — Districting  Resolution 51 

Appendix  III — Map  Designations 89 


'^44512 


/ 


! .;p 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/finalreportjune200newy_0 


CHAPTER  I— INTRODUCTION 


June  2,  1916. 

To  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment: 

On  May  22,  1914,  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  adopted 
the  following  resolution : 

“ Whereas,  Chapter  470  of  the  Laws  of  1914,  approved  by  the  Governor  April  20, 
1914,  authorizes  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  to  divide  the  City  into 
districts  and  to  regulate  the  height  of  buildings,  the  area  of  courts  and  open  spaces,  the 
location  of  trades  and  industries  and  the  erection  of  buildings  designed  for  specified 
uses ; and 

“ Whereas,  The  statute  provides  that  before  establishing  such  districts  and  adopt- 
ing such  regulations  the  said  Board  shall  appoint  a commission  ‘ to  recommend  the 
boundaries  of  districts  and  appropriate  regulations  to  be  enforced  therein  ’ ; therefore 
be  it 

“ Resolved,  That  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  appoint  a Commission 
on  Building  Districts  and  Restrictions  of  not  less  than  nine,  nor  more  than  nineteen 
members,  serving  without  pay,  if  not  already  in  the  employment  of  the  City,  to  recom- 
mend the  boundaries  of  districts  and  appropriate  regulations  to  be  enforced  therein; 
and 

“ Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  the  City  Plan  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and 
Apportionment,  the  chief  engineer  of  the  Board,  the  presidents  of  the  various  bor- 
oughs and  the  various  city  departments  be  requested  to  advise  with  the  Commission, 
and  to  co-operate  actively  with  it  in  the  preparation  and  study  of  the  necessary  data ; 
and 

“ Resolved,  That  the  secretary  of  the  Committee  on  the  City  Plan  shall  serve  also 
as  secretary  of  the  Commission;  and 

“ Resolved,  That  before  reporting  its  recommendations  the  Commission  shall  hold 
public  hearings  thereon.” 

On  June  26,  1914,  the  present  Commission  on  Building  Districts  and 
Restrictions  was  appointed  pursuant  to  the  above  resolution. 

The  work  of  the  Districting  Commission  was  preceded  by  the  investi- 
gations and  report  of  the  Heights  of  Buildings  Commission.  On  February 
27,  1913,  the  Board  of  Estimate  adopted  the  following  resolution: 

“ Whereas,  There  is  a growing  sentiment  in  the  community  to  the  effect  that  the 
time  has  come  when  effort  should  be  made  to  regulate  the  height,  size  and  arrangement 
of  buildings  erected  within  the  limits  of  the  City  of  New  York;  in  order  to  arrest  the 
seriously  increasing  evil  of  the  shutting  off  of  light  and  air  from  other  buildings  and 
from  the  public  streets,  to  prevent  unwholesome  and  dangerous  congestion  both  in 
living  conditions  and  in  street  and  transit  traffic  and  to  reduce  the  hazards  of  fire  and 
peril  to  life  ; and 

“Whereas,  Under  the  .provisions  of  Section  407  of  the  Charter,  the  height  and 
size  of  buildings  may  be  regulated  by  city  ordinance,  but  such  ordinance  must  first 
have  the  approval  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment;  therefore  be  it 

“ Resolved,  That  the  chairman  be  authorized  to  appoint  a committee  of  three 
members  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  to  take  this  general  subject 


6 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


under  consideration,  to  inquire  into  and  investigate  conditions  actually  existing,  and 
to  ascertain  and  report  whether,  in  their  judgment,  it  is  desirable  to  regulate  the 
height,  size  and  arrangement  of  buildings  hereafter  to  be  erected  or  altered  within  the 
city  limits,  with  due  regard  to  their  location,  character  or  uses,  to  examine  into  the 
practice  and  the  comparative  experience  of  other  cities  either  here  or  abroad,  and  to 
consider  and  report  upon  the  question  of  the  legal  right  of  the  City  of  New  York  to 
regulate  building  construction  in  the  manner  proposed;  and  be  it  further 

“ Resolved,  That  such  Committee  may  also  investigate  and  report  whether,  in 
their  judgment,  it  would  be  lawful  and  desirable  for  the  purpose  of  such  regulation 
to  divide  the  City  into  districts  or  into  zones,  and  to  prescribe  the  regulation  of  the 
height,  size  and  arrangement  of  buildings  upon  different  bases  in  such  different  dis- 
tricts or  zones;  and  be  it  further 

“ Resolved,  That  the  Committee,  when  appointed,  may  in  turn  appoint  an  advisory 
commission  to  aid  in  its  work,  such  commission  to  consist  of  as  many  members  as 
the  Committee  may  determine,  serving  without  pay,  if  not  already  in  the  employment 
of  the  City,  but  including  representatives  of  each  of  the  several  boroughs,  and  that 
either  the  Committee  or  its  advisory  commission  may  hold  public  hearings  in  each 
of  the  boroughs  and  may  use  all  appropriate  means  to  bring  the  subject  to  the  attention 
of  the  taxpayers  and  to  other  persons  who  may  be  interested ; and  be  it  further 

“ Resolved,  That  the  Committee  be  empowered  to  employ  a secretary,  who  shall 
also  be  the  secretary  of  the  advisory  commission,  to  secure  such  expert  or  technical 
advice  as  it  may  require  for  its  proper  guidance,  and  to  incur  such  other  incidental 
expenses  as  it  may  from  time  to  time  find  necessary,  such  disbursements  to  be  made 
from  the  contingent  fund  of  this  Board,  but  not  to  exceed  in  the  aggregate  the  sum 
of  $15,000;  and  be  it  further 

“ Resolved,  That  the  said  Committee  be  instructed  to  submit,  if  practicable,  in 
advance  of  any  general  report  that  it  may  make,  suggestions  and  recommendations 
with  relation  to  the  proposed  limitation  of  the  height  of  buildings  upon  Fifth  avenue, 
between  One  Hundred  and  Tenth  street  and  Washington  Square,  in  the  Borough  of 
Manhattan,  and  within  certain  prescribed  areas  on  either  side  of  the  said  avenue,  as 
proposed  in  the  resolution  presented  to  this  Board  on  May  9,  1912,  and  now  pending; 
and  be  it  further 

“ Resolved,  That  such  Committee  shall  submit  its  final  report  and  recommenda- 
tions to  the  Board  not  later  than  six  months  from  the  date  of  its  appointment,  and 
shall  thereupon  cease  to  exist.” 

In  accordance  with  this  resolution  the  Mayor  appointed  a Heights 
of  Buildings  Committee  with  George  McAneny,  President  of  the  Borough 
of  Manhattan,  as  Chairman.  This  Committee  appointed  an  Advisory  Com- 
mission consisting  of  the  following  members;  Edward  M.  Bassett,  Chair- 
man; Edward  C.  Blum,  Edward  W.  Brown,  William  H.  Chesebrough, 
VvTlliam  A.  Cokeley,  Otto  M.  Eidlitz,  Abram  I.  Elkus,  Burt  L.  Fenner, 
J.  Monroe  Hewlett,  Robert  W.  Higbie,  C.  Grant  La  Farge,  Nelson  P.  Lewis, 
George  T.  Mortimer,  Lawson  Purdy,  Allan  Robinson,  August  F.  Schwarzler, 
Franklin  S.  Tomlin,  Lawrence  Veiller  and  Gaylord  S.  White. 

On  December  23,  1913,  this  Advisory  Commission  submitted  its  report. 
The  Commission,  through  its  technical  stafif,  made  extensive  investigations, 
both  of  existing  conditions  in  New  York  City  and  of  the  practice  and  experi- 
ence of  other  cities,  both  domestic  and  foreign,  including  an  intensive  study 
of  the  zone  regulations  of  German  cities.  The  Commission  held  an  extended 
series  of  hearings  and  of  conferences  with  leading  experts  and  others  rep- 


INTRODUCTION 


7 


resenting  the  civic,  social,  professional,  business  and  real  estate  interests 
of  the  entire  city.  The  Commission’s  report  of  295  pages  contains  a thor- 
oughgoing and  authoritative  discussion  of  the  problem  of  regulating  the 
height,  area  and  use  of  buildings.  The  Commission  states  that  it  finds 
conclusive  evidence  of  the  need  of  greater  control  over  building  develop- 
ment. “ The  present  almost  unrestricted  power  to  build  to  any  height, 
over  any  proportion  of  the  lot,  for  any  desired  use  and  in  any  part  of  the 
city,  has  resulted  in  injury  to  real  estate  and  business  interests,  and  to  the 
health,  safety  and  general  welfare  of  the  city.”  The  Commission  found 
that  any  complete  system  of  building  control  necessitated  the  application  of 
different  regulations  to  different  parts  of  the  city  and  accordingly  recom- 
mended that  the  city  be  divided  into  districts  and  that  the  restrictions  for 
each  district  be  worked  out  with  reference  to  the  peculiar  needs  and  require- 
ments of  that  particular  district. 

The  resolution  under  which  the  Heights  of  Buildings  Commission  was 
appointed  directed  it  to  investigate  and  report  on  whether  in  its  judgment 
a districting  plan  would  be  lawful.  The  Commission  gave  much  attention 
to  this  problem  and  considered  carefully  the  various  laws  and  decisions 
bearing  on  the  subject.  As  a result  of  such  consideration  the  Commission 
gave  as  its  mature  opinion  that  reasonable  and  appropriate  regulations  for 
the  districting  of  the  city  are  constitutional  under  the  general  police  powers 
of  the  State.  The  Commission  submitted  a draft  charter  amendment  per- 
mitting the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  to  divide  the  city  into 
districts  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  height  of  buildings,  the  area  of 
courts  and  open  spaces,  the  location  of  trades  and  industries  and  the  loca- 
tion of  buildings  designed  for  specified  uses.  This  draft  amendment  was 
passed  by  the  Legislature,  approved  by  the  Governor  and  became  a law 
April  20,  1914.  (See  Appendix  I).  Pursuant  thereto  the  present  District- 
ing Commission  was  appointed. 

Taking  up  the  work  where  the  former  Heights  of  Buildings  Commis- 
sion left  it  and  using  its  data,  investigations  and  report,  the  Commission 
has  during  the  past  two  years  made  an  exhaustive  study  of  the  entire  sub- 
ject. The  Committee  on  the  City  Plan  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  placed 
at  the  disposal  of  the  Commission  its  expert  staff.  The  Commission  has 
made  an  extensive  study  of  the  present  distribution  of  population  and  of 
the  present  and  proposed  transit  facilities,  including  a detailed  transit  time 
zone  map  showing  the  estimated  time  from  14th  Street,  Manhattan,  to  every 
section  of  the  city,  under  the  new  dual  subway  system.  Maps  have  also  been 
prepared  showing  the  distribution  of  factory  employees  in  the  places  in 
which  they  work  throughout  the  city;  also  maps  showing  graphically  and 
in  detail  the  assessed  land  values  per  front  foot  throughout  the  city.  With 
the  aid  of  insurance  and  real  estate  atlases,  maps  have  been  prepared  for 
each  borough  showing  at  various  periods  in  their  history  the  transit  lines 
and  the  building  development  and  its  use  for  residential,  business  and  indus- 


8 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


trial  purposes.  The  present  building  development  has  been  most  carefully 
studied  and  maps  have  been  prepared  to  show  graphically  and  in  detail 
the  height  of  each  building  and  the  percentage  of  the  lot  covered  by  it. 
Maps  were  also  prepared  showing  existing  grades,  contours  and  other  topo- 
graphical features.  The  entire  area  has  also  been  studied  in  detail  and  on 
the  ground  by  members  of  the  Commission  and  its  staff  of  experts. 

The  Charter  amendment  under  which  the  Commission  is  acting  directs 
it  before  submitting  a final  report  to  the  Board  of  Estimate  to  make  a 
tentative  report  and  hold  public  hearings  thereon  at  such  times  and  places 
as  the  Board  shall  require.  Accordingly  on  March  10,  1916,  the  Commis- 
sion submitted  to  the  Board  a tentative  report  and  the  Board  fixed  as  dates 
for  public  hearings  March  27th,  28th,  29th  and  30th,  and  April  3d,  4th, 
5th,  6th,  10th,  11th,  12th,  13th,  17th  and  18th.  In  addition  to  the  hearings 
above  specified,  adjourned  hearings  have  been  held  as  follows:  April  20th, 
May  4th,  8th,  9th,  10th,  11th,  15th,  18th,  22d,  24th,  25th  and  31st. 

The  tentative  report  included  a brief  discussion  of  the  general  prin- 
ciples involved  in  the  proposed  plan  and  a draft  resolution  with  accompany- 
ing maps  embodying  the  plan  in  detail.  The  tentative  report  and  maps  were 
printed  and  distributed  widely  among  interested  individuals  and  associations. 
Many  of  the  maps  were  also  printed  by  various  newspapers.  A steno- 
graphic record  was  taken  of  the  public  hearings.  The  general  opinion 
expressed  was  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the  general  plan  outlined.  Not 
a single  organization  and  only  two  or  three  individuals  expressed  dissent 
from  the  general  principle  involved.  Many  individuals  and  associations 
testified  strongly  to  the  urgent  necessity  for  the  adoption  of  the  plan  pro- 
posed. Many  asked  for  detailed  modifications  of  the  plan.  Most  of  these 
were  for  the  application  of  more  restrictive  regulations.  A few  associations 
and  individuals,  while  heartily  commending  the  plan,  urged  that,  especially 
as  to  limitation  of  height  and  area  covered,  the  plan  be  made  more  stringent. 
Leading  experts  in  various  lines  appeared  and  urged  the  supreme  need  for 
the  adoption  of  the  proposed  comprehensive  plan  in  the  interest  of  public 
health,  safety  and  general  welfare.  Subsequent  to  the  hearings,  the  Com- 
mission considered  carefully  the  various  suggestions  and  protests  made 
to  it  at  the  hearings  and  through  written  or  oral  communication.  As  a result 
of  such  reconsideration  it  has  made  numerous  changes  in  detail  in  its  pro- 
posed plan.  The  general  plan  and  the  principles  underlying  it  have  not  been 
materially  changed.  The  revised  plan  is  herewith  submitted  as  the  final 
report  of  the  Commission. 


CHAPTER  II— NECESSITY  FOR  A COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN 

OF  CITY  BUILDING 


City  planning  is  a prime  need  of  our  city.  It  is  plain  common  sense 
to  have  a plan  before  starting  to  build.  City  building  is  no  exception  to  the 
rule.  Haphazard  city  building  without  a comprehensive  plan  is  ruinous. 

The  bigger  a city  grows  the  more  essential  a plan  becomes.  Traffic 
problems,  the  congestion  of  population,  the  intensive  use  of  land,  the  magni- 
tude of  the  property  values  involved,  make  the  control  of  building  develop- 
ment more  and  more  essential  to  the  health,  comfort  and  welfare  of  the 
city  and  its  inhabitants.  New  York  City  has  reached  a point  beyond  which 
continued  unplanned  growth  cannot  take  place  without  inviting  social  and 
economic  disaster.  It  is  too  big  a city,  the  social  and  economic  interests 
involved  are  too  great  to  permit  the  continuance  of  the  laissez  faire  methods 
of  earlier  days. 

As  has  been  stated  by  the  Committee  on  the  City  Plan  of  the  Board  of 
Estimate  d “ With  or  without  a comprehensive  city  plan,  the  city  will 
probably  spend  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  on  public  improvements 
during  the  next  thirty  years.  In  addition,  during  this  same  period,  property 
owners  will  spend  some  billions  of  dollars  in  the  improvement  of  their 
holdings.  To  lay  down  the  general  lines  of  city  development  so  that  these 
expenditures  when  made  will  in  the  greatest  possible  measure  contribute 
to  the  solid  and  permanent  upbuilding  of  a great  and  ever  greater  city — • 
strong  commercially,  industrially  and  in  the  comfort  and  health  of  its 
people — furnishes  the  opportunity  and  the  inspiration  for  city  planning.” 

While  city  planning  includes  the  street  and  block  layout,  park  and 
recreation  system,  location  of  public  buildings,  sewerage  system,  water 
supply,  transit  and  transportation  systems,  and  port  and  terminal  facilities, 
these  constitute  but  half  the  problem.  The  way  in  which  private  property, 
which  occupies  almost  two-thirds  of  the  entire  area,  is  developed  is  of  at 
least  equal  importance.  No  plan  for  the  development  of  public  facilities 
can  be  complete  and  effective  unless  there  goes  with  it  a comprehensive 
plan  for  the  control  of  building  development  on  private  property. 

A street  layout  planned  for  a five-story  city  may  be  wholly  inadequate 
for  a ten-story  city.  Street  capacity  adapted  to  the  convenient  movement 
of  traffic  of  all  kinds  is  of  supreme  importance  to  the  prosperity  of  the 
city.  Street  congestion  means  loss  of  economic  efficiency  and  is  a menace 
to  public  safety  and  order.  We  cannot  hope  to  plan  an  adequate  street 
system  unless  some  limit  is  placed  on  the  height  and  character  of  the 
buildings  that  the  street  system  is  to  serve. 

A street  and  block  system  that  is  best  suited  to  a residence  section 
may  be  entirely  unsuited  to  the  needs  of  a commercial  or  industrial  section. 

^ Development  and  Present  Status  of  City  Planning  in  New  York  City,  1914,  p.  12. 


10 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Certain  types  of  industries  are  best  served  by  large  block  units  and  broad 
streets.  Certain  residential  sections  are  best  served  by  shallow  blocks  and 
comparatively  narrow  streets.  Without  a plan  of  building  control  that  will 
segregate  the  industrial  from  the  residential  sections,  it  is  impossible  to  plan 
a street  and  block  system  that  will  be  suited  to  the  requirements  of  the 
various  sections  and  to  the  uses  that  it  is  intended  to  serve.  New  York 
City  has  suffered  serious  economic  and  social  loss  because  its  street 
and  lilock  system  built  up  on  a distressingly  standardized  plan  has  not  been 
adapted  to  the  particular  requirements  of  certain  types  of  industrial,  busi- 
ness and  residential  use.  With  the  existing  uncontrolled  and  haphazard 
building  development  a uniform  street  and  block  system  was  the  only  one 
that  the  city  could  properly  adopt. 

Nelson  P.  Lewis,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  a 
leading  expert  on  municipal  engineering  and  city  planning,  testified  to  the 
need  of  the  segregation  of  industrial  districts  from  the  point  of  view  of 
improved  traffic  conditions,  a convenient  street  layout  and  economic  advan- 
tage. He  said : “ This  city  has  suffered  tremendous  losses  by  the  inflexi- 

bility of  its  street  system,  which  instead  of  controlling  a subdivision  has 
been  controlled  by  the  habit  of  creating  lots  one  hundred  feet  deep,  lying 
between  streets  two  hundred  feet  apart,  and  great  enterprises,  a number  of 
which  were  formerly  located  in  the  Erie  Basin  section  of  Brooklyn,  finding 
themselves  hemmed  in  by  rigid  street  systems  to  which  more  or  less  sanctity 
was  attributed,  have  been  obliged  to  find  new  sites  on  the  New  Jersey 
meadows.  One  conspicuous  instance  of  this  is  the  Worthington  Pump 
Works.” 

The  city’s  park  system  is  valued  at  $673,000,000.  Large  additions  to 
this  system  will  be  needed  to  provide  for  the  requirements  of  Brooklyn, 
Queens  and  Richmond.  Unless  a park  system  can  be  located  with  reference 
to  the  particular  residential  sections  that  it  is  intended  to  serve,  its  value 
is  greatly  impaired.  Various  small  parks  and  parkways  have  been  located 
in  what  have  now  become  factory  sections.  A comprehensive  plan  of  build- 
ing control  would  have  made  it  possible  to  have  so  located  these  parks 
that  their  contribution  to  the  public  health,  comfort  and  welfare  would 
have  been  vastly  greater. 

The  adequacy  of  the  city’s  future  sewerage  system  is  also  in  large 
measure  dependent  on  the  adoption  of  a plan  of  building  segregation  and 
height  limitation.  The  city  recognizes  that  in  order  to  prevent  intolerable 
pollution  of  the  waters  of  the  harbor  it  must  adopt  plans  for  sewage  treat- 
ment. Segregation  of  factories  will  facilitate  the  problem  of  sewage  treat- 
ment by  making  it  possible  to  confine  the  special  facilities  required  for  the 
treatment  of  certain  trade  wastes  to  certain  factory  districts.  While  the 
height  of  buildings  has  comparatively  little  effect  on  the  adequacy  of  a 
combined  system  of  sewerage,  storm  water  and  sanitary,  it  is  of  the  very 
greatest  importance  where  a separate  sanitary  system  is  used.  Manhattan 


NECESSITY  FOR  A COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN  OF  CITY  BUILDING 


11 


is  undertaking  in  large  measure  a reconstruction  of  its  sewerage  system 
and,  in  view  of  the  necessity  for  the  early  adoption  of  sewage  treatment, 
will  reconstruct  its  sewers  on  the  separate  system.  The  other  boroughs, 
for  the  same  reason,  will  probably  adopt  in  large  measure  the  separate 
system.  Amos  L.  Schaeffer,  Consulting  Engineer,  Borough  of  Manhattan, 
an  expert  on  sewers,  testified  that  the  adoption  of  the  Commission’s  plan 
of  building  control  will  be  of  great  assistance  in  planning  the  future  sewer- 
age system  of  the  city. 

The  city  is  spending  an  enormous  amount  of  money  to  extend  and 
improve  its  rapid  transit  facilities.  This  expense  was  undertaken  largely 
for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  present  indecent,  unsafe  and  unsanitary 
congestion  on  the  transit  lines  and  for  preventing  the  further  congestion 
of  population.  New  lines  were  needed,  but  they  alone  will  be  wholly 
ineffective  in  preventing  the  continuance  and  increase  of  intolerable  conges- 
tion during  the  rush  hours  on  all  the  rapid  transit  lines — the  new  as  well 
as  the  old.  This  rush  hour  congestion  problem  is  the  inevitable  result  of 
centering  all  business  and  industry  between  the  Battery  and  59th  Street. 
If  everyone  must  come  to  Manhattan  to  work  it  will  be  quite  impossible 
to  provide  adequate  transit  facilities  during  the  rush  hours.  The  remedy 
lies  in  creating  numerous  other  business  and  industrial  centers  and  checking 
the  extension  of  the  Manhattan  areas  devoted  to  business  and  industry, 
especially  the  latter,  combined  also  with  a limitation  on  the  intensity  of  build- 
ing development  in  such  areas.  This  corrective  the  districting  plan  is  designed 
to  furnish.  Daniel  L.  Turner,  Deputy  Engineer  of  Subway  Construction  of 
the  Public  Service  Commission,  a leading  expert  on  city  passenger  transporta- 
tion, has  testified  to  the  absolute  necessity  of  adopting  such  a plan  for  the 
purposes  above  mentioned.  Mr.  Turner  said : “ Unless  a very  careful 

housing  and  districting  regulation,  such  as  you  are  trying  to  carry  out  here 
is  adopted,  it  will  be  absolutely  impossible  for  the  city  to  cope  with  its 
municipal  transportation  problem.  These  two  problems  have  got  to  be  taken 
together.  They  are  absolutely  related  to  each  other.  We  can  provide 
facilities  up  to  a maximum  of  the  street  capacity,  but  we  are  rapidly 
coming  to  the  actual  capacity  of  the  streets,  so  that  the  housing  ought  to  be 
so  controlled  and  the  manufacturing  sites  and  the  working  sites,  with  a view 
to  having  the  population  distributed  over  the  whole  area  and  in  that  way 
develop  a two-way  business  on  all  lines  to  the  very  utmost.” 

With  increasing  population  and  attendant  congestion  it  becomes  more 
and  more  important  and  difficult  to  guard  the  public  health.  A districting 
plan  to  the  extent  that  it  reduces  congestion  and  attendant  close  personal 
contact  on  the  transit  lines  and  on  stairs  and  elevators,  will  prevent  the 
transmission  of  communicable  disease.  Dr.  Haven  Emerson,  Commissioner 
of  Health,  testified  to  the  menace  of  the  rush-hour  congestion  and  the 
importance  to  public  health  of  the  proposed  districting  plan,  as  follows : 
“ Another  point  in  which  health  authorities  foresee  benefit  to  public  health 


12 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


by  a consistent  plan  for  the  control  of  the  future  growth  of  the  city  is 
in  the  improved  conditions  of  occupancy  of  traffic  conveyances.  It  is  appre- 
ciated and  acknowledged  that  the  more  congested  is  a traffic  conveyance  the 
more  dangerous  does  it  become  as  a means  of  transmitting  communicable 
disease  to  others,  and  there  is  a constant  proportionate  increase  in  infectious 
organisms  found  in  the  air  of  traffic  conveyances  as  their  congestion 
increases.  Observations  made  in  the  subway  from  the  Atlantic  Avenue 
Station  to  96th  Street  and  back  through  the  subway  during  the  rush  hours 
have  shown  a constant  increase  of  the  disease  breeding  organisms  such  as 
were  responsible  for  the  epidemic  of  infectious  colds  during  last  December, 
January  and  February.  Observations  show  the  presence  of  these  bacteria  in 
such  amounts  as  to  constitute  a serious  public  menace.  The  epidemic  cost 
the  city  two  thousand  lives  over  and  above  the  usual  death  rate  as  it  pre- 
vailed a year  ago  and  for  the  previous  five  years.  Those  deaths  were  due  to 
organisms  which  were  found  constantly  in  the  air  in  the  subway  cars,  which 
has  been  examined  in  our  laboratory.” 

The  importance  of  the  districting  plan  to  the  public  health  as  related 
to  provision  of  light  and  air  is  immediate  and  undoubted.  Adequate  natural 
light  and  air  are  admitted  to  be  fundamental  in  health  regulation.  Much 
of  the  entire  districting  plan  is  based  on  the  desire  to  secure  for  the  public 
as  wholesome  conditions  with  regard  to  provision  of  light  and  air  as  are 
compatible  with  the  necessary  and  reasonable  utilization  of  the  land.  Only 
through  a comprehensive  plan  for  the  districting  of  the  city  is  it  possible 
to  apply  adequate  and  effective  standards  of  light  and  air  in  the  interest  of 
the  public  health.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Emerson,  who 
says : “ I would  say  that  the  opinions  of  physicians  have  been  expressed 

in  reports  which  are  almost  identically  worded,  dating  back  at  least 
one  hundred  years,  with  exactly  the  same  conclusions  and  recommenda- 
tions which  might  be  considered  parallel  with  those  now  arrived  at  by  this 
Commission;  also  that  the  report  of  1832  and  previous  ones  of  citizens’ 
committees  on  conditions  of  health  in  this  city  indicated  the  necessity  of 
providing  for  the  future.  These  recommendations  were  made  when  the 
development  of  New  York  City  had  not  yet  reached  14th  Street.  We  are 
still  without  the  necessary  relief,  which  nothing  but  this  plan  of  yours  can 
provide.” 

Sunlight  destroys  disease  breeding  bacteria.  Artificial  light  as 
ordinarily  used  has  virtually  no  effect  upon  bacteria.  This  sanitary  effect 
of  sunlight  is  sufficient  reason  for  its  requirement  in  liberal  amount  wherever 
people  live  and  work.  Natural  light  also  has  undoubted  superiority  from 
the  standpoint  of  general  health  and  efficiency  of  the  workers.  The  use  of 
artificial  light  results  in  an  increase  of  eye-strain  and  reduced  physical 
resistance  to  disease.  Good  air  conditions  are  usually  possible  where  there 
is  good  natural  light ; poor  ventilation  is  a usual  accompaniment  of  the  dark 
room.  ■ This  is  borne  out  by  Dr.  Emerson  in  his  testimony  before  the  Com- 


NECESSITY  FOR  A COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN  OF  CITY  HUILDING 


13 


mission ; “ It  is  proved  that  sunlight  in  the  living  room  and  the  sleeping 

room  materially  aids  in  providing  resistance  against  diseases  like  tuber- 
culosis. Ihe  sun  has  a destructive  effect  upon  disease  breeding  bacteria. 
Direct  sunlight  is  a most  effective  disinfectant.  Direct  daylight — even 
though  not  direct  sunlight,  has  a powerful  influence  in  destroying  patho- 
genic bacteria.  In  addition  to  that,  people  who  are  able  to  live  m well- 
lighted  apartments  have  a physical  resistance  which  is  superior  to  that  of 
people  who  live  in  dark  rooms.  That  has  been  proved  under  exact  ex- 
])erimental  conditions  in  laboratory  tests  and  is  a matter  of  common  observa- 
tion among  human  beings.”  In  the  same  connection  Dr.  Emerson  said: 
” Diminished  resistance  of  humans,  as  with  vegetable  plants,  depends  upon, 
the  artiflciality  of  their  environment.  You  cannot  raise  babies  without 
light  and  air  any  more  than  you  can  raise  plants,  and  where  you  cannot  prove 
that  a disease  has  followed ’congestion,  you  can  almost  always  show  dimin- 
ished resistance.” 

Health  is  sometimes  regarded  as  merely  the  absence  of  disease,  but 
as  has  been  pointed  out  by  George  C.  Whipple,  Professor  of  Sanitary 
Engineering,  Harvard  University,  in  a memorandum  submitted  to  the 
Commission,  that  is  not  a complete  conception  of  health.  ” Health  is  more 
than  the  absence  of  disease.  It  is  something  positive,  and  involves  physique 
and  vitality  and  it  is  mental  as  well  as  physical.  The  inherent  difficulty  at 
the  present  time  is  the  absence  of  scientific  methods  of  measuring  this 
positive  element  in  health.  Yet  the  world  knows  as  a matter  of  human 
experience  that  it  is  real  and  vital.  The  expression  ‘ health  and  comfort 
of  the  people  ’ is  centuries  old,  and  these  two  ideas  are  inseparable.”  Health 
as  a positive  conception  denoting  physical  and  mental  well-being  will  be 
promoted  in  many  ways  by  the  districting  plan.  The  public  health  is  the 
sum  total  of  the  health  of  the  constituent  individuals.  Well  ordered  city 
development  cannot  fail  to  have  a marked  effect  on  the  physical  fitness  and 
vitality  of  the  city’s  inhabitants. 

Dr.  Gustav  F.  Boehme,  Jr.,  neurologist,  testified  to  the  rapid  increase  in 
nervous  disorders  and  troubles  and  to  the  very  direct  relation  between  such 
increase  and  the  present  high  buildings  and  haphazard  development  and 
the  congestion,  noise  and  confusion  incident  thereto.  The  necessity  for 
reducing  the  stress  and  strain  of  city  life  is  becoming  more  and  more  appar- 
ent. This  is  essential  if  the  city  is  to  be  a place  in  which  our  heritage  of 
health  and  vitality  is  to  be  used,  conserved  and  handed  down  to  succeeding 
generations  instead  of  being  abused  and  exhausted. 

Congestion  of  traffic  and  population  and  haphazard  building  make  the 
city’s  fire  fighting  problem  increasingly  serious.  It  becomes  increasingly 
difficult  to  move  fire  apparatus  through  the  congested  streets.  Streets 
densely  packed  with  crowds  of  people  that  quickly  form  wherever  a fire 
occurs,  interfere  with  prompt  service  after  the  scene  of  the  fire  is  reached. 
If  a serious  fire  should  break  out  in  lower  Manhattan  coincident  with  an 


14 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


explosion  or  earthquake  shock  that  would  cause  a general  panic  and  out- 
pouring into  the  streets,  it  might  be  utterly  impossible  for  the  firemen  to 
reach  the  fire  and  a terrible  conflagration  might  result.  This  is  the  plain 
truth  and  it  is  foolhardy  to  utterly  ignore  it  and  go  on  piling  up  buildings 
and  further  extending  the  danger  zone.  The  districting  plan  will,  as  to 
future  growth,  tend  to  spread  out  business  and  industry,  both  by  limiting 
the  height  of  buildings  and  by  encouraging  the  development  of  commercial 
and  idustrial  areas  in  the  other  boroughs.  In  this  connection,  John  Kenlon, 
Chief  of  the  Fire  Department,  said  in  his  testimony  before  the  Commis- 
sion : “ In  the  thirty  years  that  I have  been  connected  with  the  Fire 

Department,  lower  Manhattan  has  changed  from  a five-story  city  to  a 
twenty-five-story  city.  There  is  great  congestion  there  at  the  present  time; 
during  the  day  time  it  is  difficult  to  move  apparatus  in  response  to  fire 
calls,  in  the  lower  end  of  Manhattan  Island.  Increased  congestion  of 
people  and  traffic  in  this  section  will  cause  very  serious  delays  in  getting 
apparatus  to  work  around  the  scene  of  a fire.  Even  at  present  it  is  very 
difficult  until  the  police  reserves  arrive  and  establish  fire  lines  at  a safe 
distance  from  the  scene  of  the  fire.  The  same  condition  prevails  in  the 
uptown  section  from  23d  Street  to  45th  Street,  particularly  at  certain  hours. 
The  men  who  laid  out  the  old  part  of  the  city  250  years  ago  had  very 
little  conception  of  the  conditions  that  obtain  to-day.  Those  gentlemen 
could  not  possibly  see  the  great  10-ton  and  15-ton  motor  trucks  running 
around  on  our  streets.  Downtown  to-day  it  is  almost  impossible  to  get 
through  the  streets;  in  ten  years  from  now  horses  will  be  a very  rare  sight 
on  the  streets  of  New  York.  The  small  buggy  has  been  superseded  by  the 
Packard,  which  takes  four  times  the  space.  The  streets  are  too  narrow 
in  the  lower  part  of  Manhattan  to  take  care  of  the  traffic.  It  is  a serious 
matter,  it  requires  a great  deal  of  experience,  a good  hand  and  strong  arm 
to  drive  fire  apparatus  through  the  streets  of  lower  Manhattan.  Any  plan 
that  will  in  a measure  prevent  the  increase  of  congestion  in  the  central 
portions  of  the  city  is  a plan  in  the  right  direction.” 

The  segregation  of  residential,  business  and  industrial  buildings  will 
also  make  it  easier  to  provide  the  fire  apparatus  in  each  section  suitable 
for  the  character  and  intensity  of  development  in  that  section.  It  will  make 
it  easier  to  provide  proper  safeguards  against  fire.  It  will  increase  the 
safety  and  security  of  the  homes  of  the  people'  These  facts  were  testified 
to  by  Chief  Kenlon  of  the  Fire  Department  and  by  Edward  R.  Hardy, 
Assistant  Manager,  New  York  Fire  Insurance  Exchange. 

Segregation  as  to  use  and  limitation  of  height  are  also  essential  to  the 
prevention  of  street  accidents.  The  injury  to  life  and  limb  from  street 
accidents  is  enormous  and  is  constantly  increasing.  In  1915  there  were 
18,139  vehicular  accidents  in  the  streets  of  New  York  City.  Of  these 
608  proved  fatal.  An  orderly  plan  of  building  development  will  reduce 
such  accidents.  Street  accidents  and  street  congestion  are  directly  related. 


NECESSITY  FOR  A COM  FREIIENSIVE  PLAN  OF  CITY  BUILDING 


15 


In  so  far  as  the  districting  plan  will  tend  to  reduce  congestion  it  will  reduce 
street  accidents.  There  is  also  a direct  relation  between  the  number  of 
different  kinds  of  traffic  using  the  same  street,  with  its  resulting  confusion, 
and  the  number  of  street  accidents.  The  segregation  of  uses  with  its  result- 
ant segregation  of  kinds  of  traffic  will  have  a direct  tendency  to  reduce 
street  accidents.  In  the  residential  sections  the  number  of  accidents  to 
children  while  playing  in  the  streets  is  very  large.  By  preventing  stores, 
garages  and  factories  from  locating  on  the  residence  streets  the  vehicular 
traffic  on  such  streets  is  reduced  and  as  a direct  result  the  number  of 
accidents  to  children.  Of  the  persons  killed  by  being  struck  by  vehicles 
in  1915  over  half  were  children. 

Ernest  P.  Goodrich,  consulting  engineer  and  city  planning  expert, 
testified  to  the  importance  of  the  proposed  plan  in  effecting  a segregation  of 
kinds  of  traffic  and  thus  reducing  street  accidents.  Edmund  Dwight,  resi- 
dent manager  of  the  Employers  Liability  and  Assurance  Corporation  of 
London,  stated  his  experience  as  follows : “ My  experience  has  indicated 

that  accidents  increase  as  congestion  increases,  and  any  plan  which  will 
reduce  congestion  of  population  in  buildings  or  in  areas  of  the  city  will 
reduce  the  number  of  accidents.  The  proposed  limitation  of  heights  of 
buildings  will  reduce  congestion  in  elevators,  which  is  one  of  the  prolific 
causes  of  elevator  accidents.  Elevator  accidents  are  due  in  far  larger 
proportion  to  crowding  and  to  carelessness  on  the  part  of  passengers,  and 
to  unskillful  handling,  which  is  itself  frequently  caused  by  crowded  cars, 
than  to  defects  in  mechanical  appliances.  The  number  of  street  accidents 
also,  in  Ikrge  measure,  follow  increase  in  density  of  population,  and  it  is 
strikingly  the  case  that  the  proximity  of  manufacturing  operations  to 
crowded  residential  districts  constitutes  a peril,  because  heavy  trucking, 
express  and  similar  traffic  has  to  be  conducted  through  streets  which  are 
crowded  with  children.  There  is  no  question  in  my  mind  that  limitation 
of  building  heights  and  districting  for  classes  of  use,  so  that  manufacturing 
operations  would  be  carried  on  in  zones,  with  a minimum  residential  use, 
would  each  tend,  in  large  measure,  to  the  reduction  of  accidents  and  to  the 
safety,  as  well  as  to  the  health  of  the  people  of  New  York.” 

Heretofore  we  have  attacked  the  problems  of  public  health  and  safety 
as  related  to  building  development  in  a piecemeal  way.  Special  regula- 
tions have  from  time  to  time  been  provided  with  relation  to  tenement 
houses,  factories,  garages,  theatres  and  other  classes  of  buildings.  Such 
regulations  are  often  rendered  wholly  or  partially  ineffective  by  failure  to 
control  the  environment  of  the  building.  The  Tenement  House  Law 
provides  for  minimum  size  yards  and  outer  courts  which  really  depend 
for  their  adequacy  on  their  being  supplemented  by  similar  yards  and 
courts  on  adjoining  lots.  If,  however,  a towering  loft  building  or  ware- 
house is  built  next  to  a tenement,  the  standards  of  light  and  air  aimed  at 
in  the  Tenement  House  Law  are  impaired.  The  districting  plan  makes  it 


16 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


possible  to  provide  suitable  and  reasonable  regulations  for  each  class  of 
buildings  and  at  the  same  time  preserve  the  advantage  of  substantially 
uniform  regulations  as  to  building  height  and  yard  depth  for  all  structures 
within  the  block. 

hlvery  city  becomes  divided  into  more  or  less  clearly  defined  districts 
of  different  occupation,  use  and  type  of  building  construction.  We  have 
the  central  office  and  hnancial  district,  loft  districts,  water  front  and  indus- 
trial districts,  retail  business  districts,  apartment  house  and  hotel  districts, 
tenement  house  districts,  private  dwelling  districts.  Generally  speaking, 
a building  is  appropriately  located  when  it  is  in  a section  surrounded  by 
buildings  of  similar  type  and  use.  Strong  social  and  economic  forces  work 
toward  a natural  segregation  of  buildings  according  to  type  and  use. 
In  general,  the  maximum  land  values  and  the  maximum  rentals  are 
obtained  where  this  segregation  and  uniformity  are  most  complete.  One 
purpose  of  districting  regulations  is  to  strengthen  and  supplement  the 
natural  trend  toward  segregation. 

In  spite  of  the  natural  trend  toward  segregation,  building  development 
in  many  parts  of  the  city  is  haphazard.  The  natural  trend  toward  segrega- 
tion and  uniformity  is  not  strong  enough  to  prevent  the  sporadic  invasion 
of  a district  by  harmful  or  inappropriate  buildings  or  uses.  Once  a district 
has  been  thus  invaded,  rents  and  property  values  decline,  loans  are  called 
and  it  is  difficult  ever  to  reclaim  the  district  to  its  more  appropriate  use. 
Individual  property  owners  are  helpless  to  prevent  the  depreciation  of  their 
property.  The  districting  plan  will  do  for  the  individual  owners  what  they 
cannot  do  for  themselves — set  up  uniform  restrictions  that  will  protect 
each  against  his  neighbor  and  thus  be  of  benefit  to  all. 

While  in  New  York  City  economic  forces  tend  to  the  segregation  of 
industries  of  the  heavier  type  along  the  water  and  rail  terminals,  and  to 
the  segregation  of  certain  light  industries  near  the  wholesale,  retail,  hotel 
and  passenger  terminal  center  in  Manhattan,  there  are  many  kinds  of  light 
industry  that  are  free  from  any  segregating  force  and  locate  indiscrimin- 
inately  throughout  the  city.  They  are  found  scattered  throughout  the 
business  and  residential  sections,  especially  the  residential  sections,  from 
which  their  labor  supply  is  recruited.  The  factory  is  usually  a blight  within 
a residential  section.  It  destroys  the  comfort,  quiet  and  convenience  of 
home  life.  There  is  nothing  more  vital  toi  the  city  than  the  housing  of  its 
people.  The  exclusion  of  trade  and  industries  from  the  residential  streets 
is  essential  to  wholesome  and  comfortable  housing.  Stores,  garages  and 
other  business  buildings  scattered  among  the  residences  are  a constant 
menace  to  residence  property.  The  concentration  of  all  the  neighborhood 
business  buildings  on  the  business  streets  makes  the  transaction  of  busi- 
ness more  convenient.  The  segregation  of  dwellings  on  the  exclusively 
residential  streets  adds  to  the  convenience,  quiet  and  amenities  of  home  life, 
and  thus  tends  to  increase  property  values  on  such  streets. 


NECESSITY  FOR  A COMPREHENSIVE  PLAN  OF  CITY  HUILDING 


17 


In  New  York  City  the  purely  private  injury  incident  to  haphazard 
development  has  become  so  serious  and  widespread  as  to  constitute  a great 
public  calamity.  Through  haphazard  construction  and  invasion  by  inappro- 
priate uses  the  capital  values  of  large  areas  have  been  greatly  impaired. 
This  destruction  of  capital  value,  not  only  in  the  central  commercial  and 
industrial  section  of  Manhattan,  but  also  throughout  the  residential  sections 
of  the  five  boroughs,  has  reached  huge  proportions.  It  does  not  stop  with 
the  owners  in  the  areas  immediately  affected,  but  is  reflected  in  depressed 
values  throughout  the  city.  Market  value  for  investment  purposes  is 
always  affected  by  the  hazard  of  the  business.  Economic  depreciation  due 
to  unregulated  construction  and  invasion  by  inappropriate  uses  has  become 
a hazard  that  must  be  considered  by  every  investor  in  real  estate.  This 
extra  hazard  increases  the  net  earning  basis  required  to  induce  investment, 
and  consequently  lessens  capital  values  throughout  the  city.  Whatever  the 
capitalized  amount  that  may  be  properly  charged  to  the  economic  deprecia- 
tion hazard,  it  is  certainly  a huge  burden  and  one  that  affects  not  only  the 
individual  owners  of  real  estate  throughout  the  city  but  the  savings  and 
other  large  lending  institutions,  the  municipal  finances  and  the  general 
welfare  and  prosperity  of  the  whole  city. 

There  is  an  intimate  and  necessary  relation  between  conservation  of 
property  values  as  here  proposed  and  the  conservation  of  public  health, 
safety  and  general  welfare.  Throughout  a city  the  areas  in  which  values 
have  been  depressed  by  the  invasion  of  inappropriate  uses  or  lack  of 
building  control  as  to  height,  courts  and  open  spaces,  are  the  areas  in  which 
the  worst  conditions  as  to  sanitation  and  safety  prevail  and  where  there 
is  the  greatest  violation  of  the  things  essential  to  public  comfort,  con- 
venience and  order.  The  decline  in  property  value  in  such  districts  is  merely 
an  economic  index  of  the  disregard  of  essential  standards  of  public  health, 
safety  and  convenience  in  building  development.  Moreover,  a depressed 
district  of  changing  occupancy  is  almost  always  a district  in  which  un- 
wholesome home  and  work  conditions  prevail.  The  old  building  altered  to 
suit  a new  use  is  usually  very  faulty  in  light,  air  and  sanitation.  Declining 
values  make  it  difficult  or  impossible  to  enforce  proper  standards.  These 
depressed  districts  create  the  most  difficult  and  perplexing  problems  in  the 
establishment  and  administration  of  housing  and  factory  regulations. 

Moreover,  the  enormous  losses  sustained  by  owners  of  loft  and  tene- 
ment property  will  be  a serious  handicap  to  the  provision  of  future  build- 
ings to  house  the  increasing  population  and  the  rapidly  expanding  indus- 
trial development.  This  may  become  a very  serious  matter  from  the 
point  of  view  of  cheap  and  adequate  housing  and  safe  and  convenient 
factory  space. 

With  some  eight  billions  already  invested  in  New  York  City  real 
estate  and  the  certainty  of  added  billions  in  the  coming  years,  a plan  of  city 
building  that  will  tend  to  conserve  and  protect  property  values  becomes 


18 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


of  vital  importance  not  only  to  individual  owners  but  to  the  community 
as  a whole.  Why  not  protect  the  areas  as  yef  unspoiled  and  insure  that 
the  hundreds  of  millions  that  will  be  spent  in  the  improvement  of  real 
estate  in  the  coming  years  shall  contribute  to  the  solid  and  permanent 
ui)building  of  this  great  city.  Permanence  and  stability  can  be  secured 
only  by  a far-sighted  building  plan  that  will  harmonize  the  private  interests 
of  owners  and  the  health,  safety  and  convenience  of  the  public. 


CHAPTER  III— USE  DISTRICTS 


The  Districting  resolution  herewith  submitted,  together  with  the 
the  accompanying  use  district  maps,  provide  for  four  classes  of  use  dis- 
tricts; (1)  residence,  (2)  business,  (3)  unrestricted,  (4)  undetermined. 
The  proposed  regulations  apply  only  to  future  buildings  and  do  not  interfere 
with  any  existing  structure  or  occupancy. 

In  a residence  district  all  kinds  of  business  and  industry  are  excluded. 
Dwellings,  private  clubs  and  most  institutional  buildings  are  permitted.  The 
term  “ dwelling  ” includes  an  apartment  house,  tenement  house,  boarding 
house,  or  a hotel  having  thirty  or  more  sleeping  rooms.  The  usual  accessory 
buildings,  such  as  private  garages,  are  permitted  but  they  must  be  located 
on  the  same  plot  with  the  building  to  which  they  serve  as  accessory.  A 
private  garage  for  more  than  five  motor  vehicles  would,  however,  be 
excluded.  A private  club  that  has  as  its  chief  activity  a service  customarily 
carried  on  as  a business,  such  as  a garage,  would  be  excluded.  While  the 
regulations  are  not  intended  to  interfere  with  a doctor  or  dentist  who 
practices  his  profession  in  the  usual  inconspicuous  way  in  his  private  dwell- 
ing, they  would  exclude  any  business  such  as  a store  in  connection  with  a 
tenement,  club  or  hotel.  It  is  provided,  however,  that  the  superintendent 
of  buildings  may,  after  notice  and  hearing  and  with  appropriate  conditions 
and  safeguards,  permit  in  a residence  district  any  building  or  use  in  keeping 
with  its  use  for  residence  purposes. 

In  a business  district,  residence  and  business  uses  are  permitted  but  in- 
dustrial uses  are  either  prohibited  entirely  or  limited  in  the  percentage  of  floor 
space  they  may  occupy.  A list  of  specified  industries  and  uses  of  a clearly 
objectionable  character  are  entirely  excluded,  as  are  also  all  other  uses  that 
are  noxious  or  offensive  by  reason  of  the  emission  of  noise,  odor,  dust, 
smoke  or  gas.  No  building  may  be  used  for  factory  purposes  in  excess  of 
25  per  cent,  of  the  total  floor  space  of  the  building,  but  a space  at  least  equal 
to  the  ground  area  of  the  building  or  lot  may  be  so  used.  The  term 
factory  ” is  defined  as  a building  or  portion  of  a building  in  which  six  or 
more  persons  are  employed  in  any  process  or  part  of  a process  of  trans- 
forming or  converting  raw  material,  partly  wrought  material  or  imperfect 
material  into  forms  suitable  for  use.  This  limited  provision  for  factory  use 
in  a business  district  is  appropriate  both  on  account  of  the  considerable 
percentage  of  factory  use  required  in  connection  with  the  retail  trades  and 
on  account  of  the  numerous  customary  small  trades  and  factory  uses  that 
are  necessary  or  desirable  for  the  convenience  of  the  neighborhood  and,  if 
limited  in  size,  are  not  objectionable  from  the  point  of  view  either  of  the 
business  use  of  the  street  or  of  the  residential  use  of  the  adjacent  areas. 

A garage  for  five  or  more  motor  vehicles  will  be  excluded  from  a busi- 
ness district  except  that  with  the  approval  of  the  building  superintendent 


20 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


and  after  notice  and  hearing,  a garage  may  be  erected  in  a business  district 
on  any  portion  of  a street  between  two  intersecting  streets  on  which  there 
exists  a jiublic  garage  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  proposed  resolution. 
A similar  regulation  is  provided  in  regard  to  stables.  In  the  tentative  report 
it  was  proposed  to  permit  public  gj^irages  and  stables  in  any  business  district, 
but  the  nuisance  features  incident  to  the  indiscriminate  location  of  garages 
‘throughout  the  business  districts  were  so  great  that  the  Commission  recon- 
sidered its  former  action.  In  providing  that  garages  shall  in  general  be 
forced  to  go  to  the  unrestricted  districts,  the  Commission  has  increased  the 
numlier  of  small  unrestricted  sections  within  convenient  access  of  the  local 
residence  and  business  centers. 

The  terms  “ unrestricted  district  ” and  “ undetermined  district  ” are 
used  to  designate  the  areas  for  which  no  restrictions  or  regulations  as  to 
use  are  provided.  It  is  assumed  that  the  development  in  the  unrestricted 
districts  will  be  largely  industrial.  In  the  undetermined  districts  either  a 
residential,  business  or  industrial  use  may  prove  the  more  appropriate,  de- 
pending largely  on  future  port  and  terminal  developments.  The  undetermined 
districts  differ  from  most  of  the  other  unrestricted  areas,  chiefly  in  that  it 
is  anticipated  that  when  their  appropriate  use  is  more  fully  disclosed  it  may 
seem  wise  to  restrict  them  in  part  to  business  or  residence  use.  The  aim 
has  been  to  give  the  greatest  possible  freedom  of  action  and  to  avoid  restric- 
tions that  may  possibly  hinder  future  growth  and  development.  While  it 
is  realized  that  this  can  only  be  partially  successful  and  that  any  regulations 
now  imposed  will  have  to  be  changed  from  time  to  time,  it  seems  important 
that  they  shall  be  so  designed  as  to  secure  as  high  a degree  of  permanence 
as  is  at  present  practicable. 

In  general,  the  salt  marshes  along  and  running  back  from  the  water- 
front have  been  included  in  the  unrestricted  district.  Industry  very  naturally 
pre-empts  such  localities  both  on  account  of  the  comparative  cost  of  the  land 
and  the  possibility  of  good  water  and  rail  terminal  facilities.  In  addition, 
all  other  navigable  waterfront,  where  the  grades  and  location  are  favorable 
to  a commercial  or  industrial  development,  is  left  unrestricted.  The  unre- 
stricted area  is  allowed  to  extend  back  from  the  bulkhead  line  1,000  feet 
or  more,  depending  largely  on  the  slope  of  the  land.  In  many  cases  the 
boundary  line  of  the  waterfront  unrestricted  district  follows  quite  closely 
the  20- foot  contour  line.  This  seems  to  be  about  the  normal  level  to  which 
industry  will  extend  back  from  the  water. 

An  examination  of  the  historical  maps  prepared  by  the  Commission 
showing  industrial  development  at  various  periods  during  the  past  sixty 
years  in  Manhattan  and  Brooklyn  shows  surprisingly  little  change  in  the 
breadth  of  the  industrial  belts  extending  back  from  the  waterfronts.  There 
has  doubtless  been  a great  deal  of  change  in  the  character  of  the  industries 
located  in  a particular  section.  The  tendency  has  been  for  the  heavier, 
bulkier  types  of  industries  requiring  large  plots  to  move  from  Manhattan. 


USE  DISTRICTS 


21 


They  have  been  replaced  by  a much  larger  number  of  industries  requiring 
less  ground  area  per  industry  without  greatly  changing  the  aggregate 
requirement  for  ground  area. 

The  segregation  of  factories  will  directly  reduce  production  costs.  It 
will  make  it  possible  to  have  the  best  rail  and  water  terminal  facilities  and 
the  best  express  and  mail  facilities.  It  will  reduce  trucking  and  thus  improve 
street  traffic  conditions.  It  will  tend  to  the  segregation  of  heavy  trucking 
from  other  classes  of  street  traffic  and  thus  further  tend  toward  the  improve- 
ment of  street  traffic  conditions. 

Furthermore,  the  segregation  of  factories  along  the  rail  and  water 
terminals  and  their  consequent  exclusion  from  the  residence  sections  will 
improve  living  conditions  throughout  the  city.  A factory  is  usually  a 
nuisance  in  a residence  section.  It  is  often  directly  injurious  by  reason  of- 
noise,  odor,  dust  or  smoke.  It  always  brings  heavy  trucking  with  attendant 
noise  and  danger  to  the  safety  of  the  children,  especially  in  crowded  tene- 
ment districts.  It  often  subjects  the  neighboring  residents  and  property 
owners  to  increased  risk  from  fire  and  explosion. 

The  problem  of  congestion  of  population  is  closely  related  to  the  loca- 
tion of  trades  and  industries.  Employees  working  long  hours  at  low  wages 
can  afiford  neither  the  time  nor  the  money  to  live  far  from  their  work.  It 
has  been  shown  that  a very  large  proportion  of  such  employees  will  live 
within  walking  distance  of  their  work,  even  though  this  necessitates  their 
living  in  the  most  congested  and  unwholesome  quarters.  While  the  pro- 
posed plan  for  residential  and  industrial  districts  will  not  cure  existing  con- 
ditions it  will  help  to  prevent  an  extension  of  such  conditions.  This  is 
insured  by  providing  adequate  housing  areas  adjacent  to  the  factory  areas 
and  preventing  for  the  future  the  encroachment  by  the  factories  on  areas 
required  for  housing. 

While  economic  forces  are  quite  effective  in  securing  the  segregation 
of  industries  of  the  heavier  type  close  to  the  water  and  rail  terminals,  there 
are  in  New  York  City  an  unusually  large  proportion  of  industries  that  are 
not  subject  to  this  segregating  influence.  New  York  City  is  pre-eminent  as 
a light  manufacturing  center.  Of  the  680,510  persons  employed  in  indus- 
tries in  New  York  City  in  1909,  422,769  were  employed  in  the  following 


light  industries : 

Artificial  flowers,  feathers  and  plumes 9,759 

Boots  and  shoes 9,177 

Boxes 9,414 

Bread  and  bakery  products 20,401 

Buttons  3,635 

Clothing,  men’s 77,543 

Clothing,  women’s  110,567 

Confectionery  7,641 

Fancy  articles 3,649 

Fur  goods 10,719 

Furnishing  goods,  men’s 8,051 


22 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Hair  work  2,704 

Hats  and  caps 5,815 

Hosiery  and  knit  goods 6,082 

Jewelry  6^668 

Millinery  and  lace  goods 24,712 

Patent  medicines 5,450 

Printing  and  publishing 74,118 

Tobacco 26,664 


422,769 

The  above  enumeration  includes  only  the  larger  groups  that  may  be 
classed  as  distinctly  light  manufacturing.  Fully  two-thirds  of  the  industrial 
employees  of  the  city  are  employed  in  industries  that  do  not  find  direct  con- 
nection with  water  and  rail  terminals  a necessarily  determining  factor  in 
the  selection  of  a factory  location.  For  these  industries  the  cpiestions  of 
labor  supply  and  market  for  goods  are  much  more  important.  The  New 
York  Metropolitan  District  with  a population  of  over  7,500,000  is  itself  the 
largest  consumer  of  the  output  of  its  factories.  Moreover,  Manhattan  is 
the  great  jobbing  center  for  the  entire  country  and  this  gives  its  manufac- 
turers special  advantages  in  the  marketing  of  their  goods.  In  addition  the 
city  has  the  largest  and  most  varied  labor  supply.  Being  the  principal  port 
of  entry  for  immigrants,  it  has  an  unlimited  supply  of  the  cheaper  class  of 
labor  from  which  the  employees  of  the  clothing  trades  and  various  other 
light  industries  are  recruited. 

These  light  industries  are  scattered  indiscriminately  over  the  entire  city 
throughout  the  business  and  residential  sections.  One  good  residence  section 
after  another  has  been  progressively  invaded  and  destroyed  by  the  coming 
of  the  sporadic  factory.  This  the  proposed  plan  will  prevent. 

The  great  manufacturing  section  of  Manhattan  is  not,  as  one  might 
presuppose,  along  the  waterfronts  of  the  North  and  East  Rivers,  but  lies  in 
a narrow  belt  through  the  center  of  the  Island  from  Canal  Street  to  about 
38th  Street.  The  northward  progress  of  the  factory  zone  during  the  past 
sixteen  years  above  14th  Street  has  been  attended  by  tragic  consequences. 
The  city’s  chief  hotel  and  retail  center  was  invaded  and  substantially 
destroyed.  It  was  compelled  to  move  north  to  34th  Street  and  is  now  again 
in  danger  of  destruction.  The  simple  fact  is  that  under  New  York  City 
conditions,  with  high  loft  buildings  and  congested  streets,  the  chief  hotel, 
club,  theater  and  shopping  center  cannot  exist  in  close  proximity  to  the 
factories.  In  the  side  streets  along  the  lower  portion  of  Fifth  Avenue  the 
number  of  employees  is  so  great  that  the  surrounding  streets  are  necessarily 
congested  with  pedestrians  during  the  hours  when  the  workers  are  going  to 
or  returning  from  work.  At  the  noon  hour  when  the  workers  come  out 
from  the  factories  for  a stroll  along  Fifth  Avenue  they  monopolize  the 
sidewalks  to  the  exclusion  or  serious  inconvenience  of  those  having  business 
on  the  avenue.  An  intensive  factory  use  on  the  side  streets  is  fatal  to  the 


USE  DISTRICTS 


23 


business  use  of  the  avenue.  The  sidewalk  space  is  needed  by  the  workmen 
and  the  roadway  space  is  needed  for  the  trucking  incident  to  factory  use. 
On  the  other  hand,  all  the  available  roadway  and  sidewalk  space  would  be 
unduly  congested  if  reserved  solely  for  business  use.  Two  bodies  cannot 
occupy  the  same  space  at  the  same  time,  and  even  if  there  were  more  space 
available  it  would  be  difficult  to  harmonize  an  intensive  use  of  roadways 
and  sidewalks  for  two  such  widely  different  purposes. 

Traffic  conditions  are  the  crux  of  the  situation.  It  is  vital  to  the  exist- 
ence of  the  city  that  it  maintain  such  conditions  of  street  traffic  that  the 
city’s  chief  hotel,  club,  theater  and  shopping  center  may  permanently  be 
maintained  in  the  sole  location  that  is  suited  for  it.  The  plan  proposed  will 
protect  the  entire  Fifth  Avenue  and  Broadway  section  south  as  far  as  23d 
Street  and  between  Fourth  Avenue  and  Sixth  Avenue. 

The  exclusion  of  future  factory  lofts  from  the  above  section  will  also 
result  to  the  economic  advantage  of  the  manufacturing  industries  concerned, 
to  the  welfare  of  the  workers  and  to  the  relief  of  the  city’s  congested  transit 
facilities.  The  factories  will  be  located  on  cheaper  ground,  nearer  to  rail 
and  water  terminals  and  nearer  to  an  adequate  labor  supply.  They  can,  if 
they  find  it  desirable,  maintain  salesrooms  in  the  restricted  district.  The 
workmen  will  be  able  in  greater  proportion  to  live  within  walking  distance 
of  their  work.  This  will  be  a boon  to  the  workers  who  walk,  in  that  it  will 
save  them  carfare  and  the  necessity  of  spending  about  an  hour  and  a quarter 
a day  on  the  cars  under  conditions  of  overcrowding  that  are  a menace  to 
health,  comfort  and  safety.  And  just  to  the  extent  that  they  do  this  will 
this  condition  of  congestion  be  relieved  for  those  who  will  still  have  to  ride 
on  transit  lines  during  the  rush  hours. 

Retail  business  naturally  tends  to  segregate.  The  grouping  of  a few 
of  the  neighborhood  stores  and  business  buildings  on  the  main  avenue  or 
thoroughfare  creates  the  center  that  attracts  other  stores  and  makes  that 
particular  street  the  most  desirable  place  in  which  to  do  business.  In  spite 
of  this  strong  trend  toward  segregation,  unless  prevented  by  law,  the  occa- 
sional store  will  come  into  the  midst  of  a residential  community,  to  the 
detriment  both  of  the  residential  section  and  of  the  natural  local  business 
street. 

In  residential  neighborhoods  the  plan  has  been  to  preserve  the  side 
streets  wherever  possible  for  strictly  residential  use.  The  avenues  along 
the  ends  of  the  block  and  main  thoroughfares  have  usually  been  included 
in  the  business  districts.  The  business  use  on  the  avenue  is  permitted  to 
extend  100  feet  back  along  the  residential  side  streets.  In  the  less  developed 
sections  it  has  often  seemed  feasible  to  indicate  only  every  second  or  third 
avenue  for  business  use  and  thus  secure  a larger  and  more  self-contained 
residential  area.  This,  it  is  believed,  will  improve  living  conditions  and  will 
conserve  values  on  both  the  business  and  residence  streets. 

The  amount  of  space  needed  for  retail  business  purposes  depends  a 


24 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


good  deal  on  the  economic  condition  and  habits  of  the  population.  Gen- 
erally speaking,  the  smaller  the  average  income  per  family  the  larger  the 
proportion  that  will  be  spent  in  the  purely  local  stores.  In  the  case  of  the 
very  poor,  practically  the  entire  income  is  spent  in  the  local  stores.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  well-to-do  make  a very  large  proportion  of  their  purchases 
outside  of  the  local  area.  The  local  retail  section  of  a well-to-do  neighbor- 
hood may  be  confined  to  a very  limited  variety  of  shops.  Consequently,  a 
tenement  section  requires  a much  larger  allowance  of  retail  business  space 
than  an  elevator  apartment  section.  It  is  believed,  however,  that  even  in 
the  most  crowded  tenement  sections,  if  business  had  been  confined  to  the 
avenues  along  the  ends  of  the  blocks,  sufficient  business  space  would  have 
been  provided  and  living  conditions  in  the  side  residential  streets  would 
have  been  very  greatly  improved.  In  an  elevator  apartment  section  a busi- 
ness street  every  second  or  third  avenue  is  ample. 

The  protection  of  the  home  environment  is  vital  to  the  welfare  of  the 
state.  It  needs  no  argument  to  demonstrate  that  a business  or  industrial 
street  does  not  furnish  the  most  favorable  environment  for  a home. 

Quiet  is  a prime  requisite.  The  zone  plan,  by  keeping  business  and 
industrial  buildings  out  of  the  residential  streets,  will  decrease  the  street 
traffic  in  the  residential  sections  and  thus  reduce  to  a minimum  noise  incident 
to  street  traffic.  Aside  from  the  increased  vehicular  traffic  the  business  and 
industrial  uses  disturb  the  quiet  and  peace  of  the  residential  street  by  the 
crowds  of  employees  and  others  incident  to  a business  or  industrial  use. 
The  above  evils  are  present  even  though  the  business  or  industry  is  in  itself 
entirely  unobjectionable  from  the  standpoint  of  noise.  Dr.  Gustav  F. 
Boehme  testified  that  business  and  industrial  uses  on  a residential  street  and 
the  noise  and  confusion  incident  thereto  made  such  streets  much  less 
healthful  and  desirable  for  residence  purposes.  He  said  that  such  conditions 
tended  to  produce  and  intensify  all  kinds  of  nervous  disorders. 

The  efficient  cleaning  of  the  streets  and  the  collection  of  refuse  are  of 
great  importance  to  the  health  and  welfare  of  the  city.  The  segregation 
of  uses  will  make  it  possible  to  adopt  more  efficient  and  economical  methods 
for  each  particular  street  or  section.  It  is  recognized  that  for  sanitary 
reasons  a residential  street  should  be  kept  cleaner  than  a business  or  indus- 
trial street.  If,  however,  there  is  a mixed  occupancy,  residential,  business 
and  industrial,  the  traffic,  trade  wastes  and  litter  incident  to  business  and 
industrial  use  may  make  it  physically  or  economically  impossible  to  keep  the 
street  in  the  good  sanitary  condition  demanded  for  residential  use.  John  T. 
Fetherston,  Commissioner  of  Street  Cleaning,  testified  on  this  point  as 
follows : 

“ It  is  well  known  that  where  different  public  conditions  exist  in  any  particular 
locality,  it  is  impossible  to  adopt  a single  uniform  system  for  cleaning  streets  as  well 
as  collecting  refuse  in  that  locality.  On  the  other  hand,  where  the  district  is  of  a 
mixed  type,  involving  iridustry,  manufacturing,  as  well  as  a residential  section,  it  is 
not  possible  to  plan  the  most  -economical  system  of  street  cleaning  and  refuse  collec- 


USE  DISTRICTS 


25 


tion,  because  conditions  will  differ  in  various  parts  of  such  intermixed  districts.  I 
would  say,  in  general,  that  the  development  of  the  zone  system,  involving  an  orderly 
development  of  building  zones,  should  ultimately  tend  to  economy  in  the  cleaning  of 
streets  and  in  the  collection  of  refuse,  as  well  as  providing  a plan  and  a system  which 
will  meet  particular  conditions  of  each  district  or  section  dependent  upon  the  uses  to 
which  the  section  or  district  is  put.  The  demand  for  sanitation  varies  with  the  type 
of  building  occupants.  A residential  street  requires  at  least  a higher  standard  of 
street  conditions  than  would  a business  or  a mixed  type  of  street,  and  a great  many 
complaints  come  to  the  Street  Cleaning  Department  from  streets  where  mixed  busi- 
ness and  residential  occupancy  is  in  force.  If  stores  could  be  segregated,  plans  in 
that  connection  could  be  adapted  to  that  particular  type  of  street,  whereas,  if  condi- 
tions are  mixed,  you  can  only  compromise. 

“ There  are  some  streets  in  lower  Manhattan  where  it  is  hardly  possible  to.  clean 
the  streets  during  the  day  time  on  account  of  the  procession  of  vehicles  which  prevents 
the  cleaners  from  collecting  the  street  dirt.  On  that  type  of  street  the  same  sanitary 
conditions  cannot  be  maintained  as  would  be  required  in  a residential  street.  In  that 
respect  traffic  conditions  in  a residential  locality  also  adversely  affect  the  street  because 
there  may  be  a residential  street  which  connects  with  a traffic  street,  and  it  is  not 
possible  to  keep  that  residential  street  in  as  good  a condition  as  other  similar  streets 
in  the  same  locality,  because  the  men  cannot  work  advantageously  while  traffic  occupies 
the  street.  Even  in  the  case  of  mixed  occupancy  of  a particular  block,  residence,  busi- 
ness and  factory  use,  the  factories  and  business  places  in  that  particular  block  tend  to 
bring  heavy  traffic  into  the  block  and  make  it  difficult  to  keep  it  in  the  best  sanitary 
condition.” 

In  a residential  street  the  number  of  street  accidents,  chiefly  to  children, 
varies  directly  with  the  vehicular  traffic.  Stores,  garages,  factories  and 
other  business  buildings  increase  the  amount  of  vehicular  traffic.  ^lost 
side  streets  that  have  no  business  or  industrial  buildings  have  little  traffic. 
Very  often  a single  business  building  in  the  midst  of  a residential  block 
will  so  increase  traffic  as  greatly  to  increase  the  number  of  street  accidents. 
This  will  be  particularly  true  if  it  is  a congested  tenement  district.  Here 
the  streets  swarm  with  children.  They  must  have  some  place  to  play  and 
unfortunately  there  is  no  place  but  the  street.  A very  large  proportion  of 
street  accidents  occur  to  children  while  playing  in  the  streets  in  front  of 
their  homes.  The  zone  plan  will,  as  to  the  future,  segregate  the  business 
and  industrial  buildings  from  the  residential  streets  and  thus  tend  to  reduce 
the  enormous  toll  of  street  accidents. 

In  the  crowded  tenement  districts  having  stores  on  the  ground  floor, 
the  roadways  are  congested  with  vehicular  traffic  and  push  carts  and  the 
sidewalks  with  business  encroachments  and  pedestrians.  There  is  absolutely 
no  place  for  the  child  to  exercise  natural  play  instincts.  Play  is  as  necessary 
to  the  child  as  food  and  clothing.  It  is  this  thwarting  of  the  boy’s  craving 
for  play  that  leads  to  a large  proportion  of  the  juvenile  delinquency  cases 
that  come  before  the  Children’s  Courts.  Ernest  M.  Coulter,  for  ten  years 
clerk  of  the  Children’s  Court,  testified  he  had  found  by  investigation  that 
this  thwarting  of  the  play  instinct  was  responsible  for  at  least  40  per  cent, 
of  the  delinquency  cases.  While  the  population  of  the  city  is  largely 


26 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


recruited  from  the  country,  the  city’s  criminal  population  is  largely  bred 
right  within  its  own  congested  centers. 

The  moral  influences  surrounding  the  homes  are  of  the  greatest  im- 
portance. The  sordid  atmosphere  of  the  ordinary  business  street  is  not  a 
favorable  environment  in  which  to  rear  children.  Immediate  and  continual 
proximity  to  the  moving  picture  show,  dance  hall,  pool  room,  cigar  store, 
saloon,  candy  store  and  other  institutions  for  the  creation  and  satisfaction 
of  appetites  and  habits  is  not  good  for  the  moral  development  of  the  child. 
Influences  and  temptations  resulting  from  the  proximity  of  such  business 
to  the  homes  may  affect  seriously  the  morals  of  the  youth  of  the  community. 
Under  such  conditions  it  is  difficult  to  cultivate  the  ideals  of  life  that  are 

I 

essential  to  the  preservation  of  our  civilization. 

Rowland  Haynes,  an  expert  on  recreation  facilities  and  secretary  of 
the  Committee  on  Recreation  of  the  Board  of  Estimate,  testified  to  the 
practical  impossibility  of  providing  enough  playgrounds  for  the  children  in 
the  crowded  tenement  sections  and  to  the  relief  to  this  situation  that  the 
districting  plan  will  afford  by  creating  residential  districts  from  which  busi- 
ness and  industry  will  be  excluded  and  which  can  therefore  be  used  as  tempo- 
rary play  spaces.  Mr.  Haynes  said : 

“ The  advantage  to  the  whole  recreation  problem  lies  in  having  reserved  residence 
streets.  By  having  streets  reserved  for  residence  purposes  it  is  going  to  be  possible, 
since  the  delivery  traffic  in  such  streets  will  be  comparatively  light,  to  use  some  of 
them  for  temporary  play  places,  as  was  done  by  the  Police  Department  in  about  25 
locations  last  summer.  The  only  thing  I wish  to  emphasize  is  the  urgency  and  im- 
portance of  such  possibilities  which  are  opened  up  by  the  action  of  your  Commission. 

“ In  the  first  place,  we  have  to  realize  that  through  some  studies  which  we  had 
previously  made  we  have  found  that  wherever  the  density  of  population  exceeds 
per  acre,  about  80  per  cent.,  in  fact,  somewhat  over  80  per  cent,  of  the  children  have 
to  play  away  from  home,  either  because  there  is  no  place  in  their  own  back  yards  or 
because  that  space  is  so  small  that  they  have  no  chance  to  play  any  of  the  larger  space 
games.  Out  of  the  54  wards  in  Manhattan  and  Brookfim,  all  but  seven  exceed  that 
density.  If  we  take  the  city  as  a whole,  including  all  of  the  boroughs,  we  find  that 
84  per  cent,  of  the  population  of  New  York  lives  in  districts  where  the  density  exceeds 
this  figure  of  37.5  per  acre.  Some  neighborhoods  in  New  York  go  up  to  18  times 
that  density.  If  we  take  84  per  cent,  of  the  whole  number  of  children  in  this  city 
between  5 and  15  years  of  age  as  the  number  living  in  these  more  densely  populated 
districts,  and  if  we  then  take  80  per  cent,  of  this  84  per  cent,  as  the  number  who  will 
have  to  play  away  from  home,  we  find  about  680,000  children  in  New  York  City  who 
have  got  to  play  away  from  home.  The  average  daily  attendance  last  summer  at  all 
the  playgrounds  in  New  York  City  was  less  than  one-third  of  680,000.  This  includes 
the  average  daily  attendance  at  park  playgrounds,  school  playgrounds  and  playgrounds 
conducted  by  settlements  and  other  philanthropic  agencies.  In  other  words,  all  the 
public  and  private  agencies  which  we  now  have  are  reaching  only  about  one-third  of 
the  child  population  who  must  play  away  from  home.  Seventy-five  per  cent,  of  these 
playgrounds  close  after  the  summer  season.  This  means  that  larger  opportunities  for 
play  are  urgently  needed.  To  purchase  enough  additional  places  to  reach  the  remain- 
ing two-thirds  of  the  children  who  must  play  away  from  home  would  bankrupt  the 
city.  Hence  we  must  use  more  intensively  the  land  that  the  city  already  owns.  Hence 
the  method  which  was  introduced  last  summer  by  the  Police  Commissioner  of  using 


USE  DISTRICTS 


27 


streets  reserved  for  play  for  certain  hours  in  the  day  in  certain  districts,  it  seems  to 
me,  must  for  some  time  to  come  be  extended.  My  only  purpose  in  accepting  the  invita- 
tion of  your  Commission  to  speak  thus  briefly  is  to  point  out  that,  while  this  plan  of 
use  districts  is  worked  out  for  a different  purpose,  it  is  going  to  be  of  very  genuine 
and  fundamental  value  to  conditions  which  we  don’t  like  but  which  we  have  got  to 
face  in  the  playground  and  recreation  situation  here  in  New  York. 

“The  restricting  of  residential  streets  against  factories  and  against  stores  and 
against  public  garages  make  those  streets  better  for  play  use,  first,  because  it  reduces 
the  amount  of  traffic  into  those  streets.  It  makes  the  traffic  into  those  streets  simply 
delivery  traffic  for  household  necessities,  which  is  much  less  than  any  through  traffic 
or  traffic  to  garages,  or  delivery  traffic  to  and  from  stores.  It  reduces  the  amount  of 
traffic  and  thus  makes  the  burden  of  reserving  a street  for  play  purposes  much  less. 
In  the  second  place  it  makes  possible  the  reservation  for  play  purposes  of  residence 
streets  which  are  near  those  on  which  the  children  are  living.  In  short,  it  makes  pos- 
sible the  reservation  of  play  streets  without  burden  to  ’traffic  and  near  where  they  are 
needed.” 

Fire  insurance  rates  recognize  the  distinctly  greater  risk  of  the  tene- 
ment with  stores  on  the  ground  floor  as  compared  with  the  tenement  with- 
out stores.  Increased  fire  risk  for  the  tenement  with  stores  must  necessarily 
mean  increased  fire  risk  for  all  neighboring  buildings.  The  menace  to 
neighboring  residential  buildings  in  the  case  of  an  ordinary  store  is  multiplied 
in  the  case  of  a theater,  garage,  warehouse  or  factory.  Even  where  in  the 
case  of  a tenement  with  a store  on  the  ground  floor  the  firemen  succeed 
in  preventing  the  fire  from  spreading  to  the  tenements  above,  it  may  cause 
serious  loss  of  life  from  smoke  or  panic.  Chief  Kenlon  testified  to  the 
desirability  from  the  standpoint  of  fire  prevention  and  safety  of  providing 
for  the  establishment  of  residence  districts  from  which  stores  would  be 
excluded.  Edward  R.  Hardy,  assistant  manager.  New  York  Fire  Insurance 
Exchange,  produced  statistics  and  evidence  of  the  increased  fire  risk  to  tene- 
ments having  stores  on  the  ground  floor.  ]\Ir.  Hardy  said : “ The  rate  of 
insurance  in  a store  and  dwelling  building  reflects  greater  insurance  risks. 
The  ordinary  private  dwelling,  now  accepted  as  a building  occupied  by  not 
more  than  two  families,  if  it  changes  its  character  so  that  the  first  floor  or 
basement  is  occupied  for  a store,  with  one  family  above,  the  insurance  rate 
is  about  twice  as  much  as  when  it  was  occupied  wholly  for  dwelling  pur- 
poses. This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  store  brings  always  an  unknown 
quantity  of  waste  material,  poor  protection  to  stoves,  gas  lights,  care  of 
ashes  and  ordinary  accumulations — the  risk  is  about  two  to  one.  Even  if 
special  precautions  are  provided  to  prevent  the  spread  of  Are  from  the 
business  building  to  the  tenement  above  there  is  great  danger,  especially 
on  the  ground  of  safety  to  the  occupants  of  the  tenement.  The  proposition 
frequently  advanced  that  the  first  floor  is  so  protected  that  there  shall  be 
no  communication  when  there  is  a store  in  the  basement  with  the  floors 
above,  overlooks  the  fact  that  in  a fire  the  smoke  will  always  seek  any 
exit  available.  It  will  ascend  naturally  if  there  is  a way.  If  not,  it  will 
pour  out  of  the  doors  and  windows  and  follow  up  the  side  of  the  building 


28 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


and  enter  the  living  tloors  in  that  way.  Some  of  the  most  serious  panics 
have  been  due  not  to  lire,  but  purely  to  the  smoke  condition.” 

That  the  invasion  of  the  residential  street  by  trade  and  industry  is 
generally  recognized  as  a serious  evil  by  the  residents  themselves,  has  been 
conclusively  demonstrated  by  experience.  With  the  coming  of  trade  and 
industry  those  residents  who  can  afford  to  do  so  leave  the  street,  rents 
fall  and  the  lending  institutions  call  their  loans.  The  combination  of  re- 
duced rents  and  higher  interest  rates  leads  to  many  foreclosures  and  places 
most  owners  in  such  a precarious  financial  position  that  they  are  unable 
to  make  needed  repairs  and  improvements.  It  becomes  difficult  or  impos- 
sible for  the  city  authorities  to  enforce  even  minimum  standards  of  public 
health  and  safety. 


CHAPTER  IV— APPROPRIATE  INTENSITY  OF  THE  USE 

OF  LAND 


For  city  building  it  is  not  alone  necessary  that  there  shall  be  a plan 
that  will  segregate  buildings  according  to  use,  but  it  is  also  necessary  that 
there  shall  be  a segregation  according  to  intensity  of  building  development. 
This  is  essential  in  order  to  secure  to  each  section  of  the  city  as  much 
light,  air,  safety  from  fire  and  relief  from  congestion,  with  all  its  attendant 
evils,  as  is  consistent  with  the  most  beneficial  use  of  the  land.  Intensity 
of  use  should  be  so  regulated  that  assuming  that  the  entire  section  should 
be  built  up  uniformly  with  buildings  of  the  maximum  height  and  extent 
allowed  the  section  as  a whole  would  be  appropriately  improved. 

The  maximum  beneficial  use  of  any  given  block  or  area  is  dependent 
on  a certain  measure  of  uniformity  in  its  development  as  regards  height, 
yards  and  open  spaces.  Such  use  would,  in  general,  be  enhanced  if  the 
property  owners  could  enter  into  an  agreement  uniformly  restricting  the 
height  of  buildings  and  fixing  the  minimum  area  of  courts  and  yards.  The 
size  of  courts  and  yards  is  in  most  cases  of  as  much  benefit  to  a man’s 
neighbors  as  to  himself.  It  is  therefore  appropriate  that  each  should  con- 
tribute in  substantial  equality  to  the  common  stock  of  light  and  air.  There 
can  be  no  maintenance  of  healthful  conditions  of  light  and  air  and  no 
stability  of  values  if  each  individual  owner  is  at  liberty  to  build  to  any  height 
and  over  any  proportion  of  his  lot  without  regard  to  his  appropriate  and 
reasonable  contribution  to  the  light  and  air  of  the  block. 

The  speculative  builder  puts  up  the  first  high  building  in  a block..  The 
windows  are  on  property  lines  or  on  narrow  courts.  Perhaps  a five-foot 
rear  yard  is  provided.  But  with  all  the  free  space  on  the  adjacent  lots  the 
building  is  light  and  airy,  is  attractive  to  tenants  and  shows  a good  return 
to  the  purchaser.  Other  buildings  follow  and  their  builders  see  no  reason 
why  they  should  keep  down  lower  or  provide  larger  yards  or  courts  than 
the  first.  The  result  is  tragic  from  either  a private  or  a public  point  of  view. 

All  this  has  been  conclusively  demonstrated  by  costly  experience  in  the 
recent  history  of  the  office  and  loft  building  sections  of  Manhattan.  Whole 
areas  have  been  built  up  piecemeal  with  towering  buildings  having  inadequate 
courts  and  yards  without  much  thought  of  ultimate  consequences.  Such 
areas  are  in  process  of  being  smothered  by  their  own  growth.  The  streets 
are  inadequate  to  handle  the  traffic  induced  by  the  multiplication  of  floor 
area  to  be  served  and  the  buildings  constructed  without  reference  to  the 
width  of  the  streets,  yards  and  courts  on  which  they  abut  shut  out  light 
and  air  essential  to  health  and  to  rental  on  a basis  that  will  permit  of  a 
reasonable  return  on  the  investment. 

The  social  and  economic  desirability  of  limited  height  and  minimum 
court  and  yard  provisions  has  been  clearly  established  by  apartment  house 


30 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


construction  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  Had  similar  regulations 
been  applied  to  the  office  and  loft  buildings,  great  loss  would  have  been 
prevented.  All  agree  that  the  Tenement  House  Law  accomplished  a most 
desirable  reform  in  the  interest  both  of  owners  and  tenants  in  establishing 
regulations  as  to  height,  area  covered,  yards  and  courts.  In  exclusively 
residential  blocks  in  certain  of  the  more  intensively  developed  sections  light 
and  air  conditions  have  been  standardized  and  property  values  stabilized  by 
ensuring  that  each  owner  shall  make  a reasonable  contribution  to  the  light 
and  air  of  the  block. 

Only  by  a complete  districting  plan  can  the  mutually  advantageous 
principle  contained  in  the  Tenement  House  Law  be  applied  to  all  kinds  of 
buildings,  in  all  parts  of  the  city.  There  must  first  be  a partial  segregation 
of  buildings  according  to  use,  and  second,  a gradation  of  height,  court  and 
yard  provisions,  particularly  as  affecting  residential  buildings,  in  accordance 
with  the  present  and  prospective  intensity  of  use  in  the  various  sections  of 
the  city. 

The  intensity  of  building  development  appropriate  for  each  district  is 
dependent  on  the  character  of  occupation  and  use  in  that  particular  district. 
Certain  trades  and  industries  require  structures  of  unusual  size  and  shape. 
A comparatively  high  degree  of  concentration  is  important  for  the  facilita- 
tion of  business  in  an  office  district.  The  demand  for  housing  varies  with 
the  differing  tastes  and  necessities  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  city.  There  is  a 
demand  and  a need  for  single-family  dwellings,  as  well  as  for  hotels  and 
apartment  houses. 

In  building  a city  it  is  sometimes  assumed  that  we  should  start  with 
a certain  miodel  type  of  residence  and  seek  to  make  that  type  universal. 
If  a density  of  not  exceeding  eight  families  to  the  acre  is  desirable,  build- 
ing regulations  should  be  devised  to  prevent  a greater  density.  The  prob- 
lem is  not  so  simple.  The  problem  of  housing  accommodations  and  desir- 
able densities  cannot  be  profitably  considered  without  reference  to  a par- 
ticular city,  with  a known  topographic,  transit,  commercial  and  social 
organization  and  an  assumed  probable  rate  of  increase  in  population.  We 
cannot  annihilate  time  and  space,  and  as  long  as  these  factors  are  appreciable 
the  problem  of  the  appropriate  intensity  of  the  use  of  land  must  always 
remain  relative.  There  can  be  no  absolute  standard. 

Most  men  in  choosing  a home  in  a large  city  must  weigh  various  diver- 
gent considerations  and  strike  the  balance  that  gives  a maximum  of  satis- 
faction. They  have  to  sacrifice  a desire  for  open  space  and  isolation  in 
order  to  save  time  and  money  and  avoid  great  personal  inconvenience. 
Many  families  prefer  Manhattan  apartments  for  social  reasons  or  because 
of  proximity  in  time  and  space  to  clubs,  hotels  and  theatres,  or  J^ecause 
of  nearness  to  place  of  business  or  work.  In  choosing  a home  the  business 
man  who  works  from  10  A.  M.  to  7 P.  M.  at  his  office,  and  the  laborer 
who  works  in  a Manhattan  factory  from  7 A.  M.  to  6 P.  M.  are  both  likely 


APPROPRIATE  INTENSITY  OF  THE  USE  OF  LAND 


31 


to  sacrifice  the  numerous  advantages  of  a suburban  villa  for  the  convenience 
of  a Manhattan  apartment  or  flat. 

That  considerable  areas  near  the  heart  of  the  city  should  be  very  inten- 
sively used  for  tenements  and  apartments  is  natural  and  probably  inevitable. 
The  demand  for  housing  is  naturally  greatest  in  the  most  favorable  locations. 
Were  it  not  for  the  ability  to  multiply  housing  area  by  placing  one  dwelling 
on  top  of  another,  rents  would  be  prohibitive  in  these  favored  locations  for 
practically  all  those  who  now  occupy  apartments  or  flats.  It  is  natural  that 
the  intensity  of  the  demand  for  housing  should  vary  in  the  different  parts 
of  a given  city,  the  general  tendency  being,  starting  with  the  highest  intensity 
of  demand  near  the  center,  for  this  demand  to  fall  rapidly  toward  the 
periphery  of  the  city. 

Beyond  the  central  zone  of  the  more  intensive  housing,  the  provision 
of  light,  air  and  open  space,  may  be  rapidly  increased.  Radiating  from  the 
common  business  center,  the  amount  of  land  available  for  development 
rapidly  increases.  When  it  is  necessary  to  use  a rapid  transit  line  to  get 
to  the  business  center  a few  minutes  more  or  less  on  the  train  is  unim- 
portanL  Beyond  this  central  housing  zone,  therefore,  regulations  requiring 
much  more  adequate  courts,  yards  and  open  spaces,  may  properly  be 
required. 

The  assumption  that  an  individual  owner  in  a city  should  have  un- 
limited liberty  to  cover  his  entire  lot  to  any  height  is  incompatible  either 
with  the  interest  of  owners  generally  or  with  that  of  the  public.  It  is  not 
possible  to  secure  the  light  and  air  that  is  essential  both  to  the  profitable 
use  of  land  and  to  the  health  and  comfort  of  the  public  unless  the  height 
and  area  covered  by  buildings  is  limited.  As  Professor  Whipple  has  well 
stated : “ While  in  general  rights  in  the  use  of  land  are  bounded  by  vertical 
planes,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  sun’s  rays  fall  slantingly  upon 
the  land  while  the  wind  movements  are  chiefly  horizontal.  These  natural 
elements  are  interfered  with  by  excessively  high  and  crowded  buildings, 
hence  there  are  rights  in  land  ownership  which  extend  beyond  the  vertical 
planes.”  In  a memorandum  submitted  to  the  Commission,  Professor  Whip- 
ple discusses  the  importance  of  light  and  air  in  part  as  follows : 

“ Considered  from  the  standpoint  of  light  the  sun’s  rays  profoundly  affect  the 
lighting  of  rooms.  This  is  a matter  of  common  knowledge,  but  quantitative  relations 
have  been  shown  by  many  photometer  tests  made  at  points  located  at  different  distances 
from  windows,  and  by  similar  tests  made  at  the  windows  of  different  stories  in  tall 
buildings  the  exterior  lighting  of  which  is  influenced  by  adjoining  buildings.  Sunlight 
likewise  causes  movements  of  the  air.  This  is  due  to  unequal  heating  in  different 
places.  The  air  currents  thus  set  up  are  gentle  and  desirable.  Places  which  never 
receive  the  sunlight  are  more  likely  than  others  to  contain  stagnant  air.  The  sun’s 
rays  have  a marked  disinfecting  action  and  prevent  the  growth  of  molds  and  fungi, 
thereby  eliminating  odors  of  certain  kinds.  They  also  destroy  bacterial  life,  whether 
the  bacteria  are  floating  in  the  air  or  are  attached  to  the  exposed  surfaces  of  pave- 
ments, floors  or  walls.  To  the  extent  to  which  this  occurs  the  danger  of  infection  from 


32 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


certain  disease  germs  is  lessened.  Sunlight  has  both  a physiological  and  psychological 
inlluence  on  human  beings. 

“By  daylight  is  meant  the  indirect  lighting  from  the  sun,  that  is,  lighting  received 
from  the  sky  or  clouds  and  reflected  from  various  surfaces.  While  it  is  possible  for 
human  beings  to  exist  without  direct  sunlight  and  even  without  daylight,  it  is  the 
experience  of  the  race  that  both  sunlight  and  daylight  in  sufficent  amounts  are  highly 
desirable.  Daylight  is  necessary  not  only  for  health  and  comfort  but  for  economic 
reasons.  Too  little  light  causes  eye-strain  with  its  train  of  physiological  disturbances, 
and  decreases  the  productiveness  of  work.  It  unfavorably  influences  the  mental  con- 
dition. Light  promotes  cheerfulness,  while  gloomy  rooms  depress  vitality.  Lack  of 
daylight  limits  the  length  of  the  working  day  in  some  industries  and  increases  the 
amount  of  artificial  light  required.  Artificial  lighting  with  oil  or  gas  tends  to  vitiate 
the  air  by  increasing  the  carbonic  acid  and  moisture,  and  even  by  increasing  the 
poisonous  carbonic  oxide.  Artificial  lighting  also  increases  fire  risks.  Lack  of  exterior 
lighting  increases  the  amount  of  window  space  required  and  this  in  turn  increases  the 
heat  loss  in  buildings  in  winter.  In  these  and  other  ways  insufficent  lighting  not  only 
results  in  inconvenience  to  human  beings  but  may  be  a positive  menace  to  the  health, 
safety  and  morals  of  the  people.  The  amount  of  daylight  received  in  buildings  is 
greatly  affected  by  adjoining  buildings,  by  their  positions,  their  height,  and  by  the 
character  of  their  walls,  both  in  color  and  material. 

“ The  necessity  of  adequate  ventilation  need  not  be  argued  but  it  is  not  as  fully 
realized  as  it  should  be  that  the  air  which  enters  a building,  both  in  amount  and 
quality,  is  influenced  by  the  surrounding  buildings.  If  buildings  are  too  close  together 
there  is  likely  to  be  a stagnation  of  the  air  between  them.  The  ventilation  of  streets, 
alleys,  courts  and  interior  spaces  between  buildings  is  as  much  a matter  of  public 
importance.  Street  ventilation  is  influenced  not  only  by  the  orientation  of  the  streets 
and  the  prevailing  wind  movements,  but  by  the  height,  size,  shape  and  character  of 
buildings,  and  their  distances  apart.  In  cavernous  streets  there  are  excessive  air 
currents  near  the  ground,  and  at  times  great  air  movements,  especially  objectionable 
in  winter.  On  the  other  hand,  at  times  of  gentle  air  movements  there  may  be  no 
currents  at  all  near  the  streets  and  pavements  between  high  buildings  because  the 
friction  of  the  air  passing  through  the  narrow  channels  prevents  them.  In  other 
words,  narrow  streets  lined  with  high  buildings  tend  to  produce  extreme  conditions 
of  air  movement  and  both  extremes  are  objectionable.  In  regulating  the  size  and 
height  of  buildings  with  reference  to  the  streets  the  city  is  to  a considerable  extent 
controlling  street  ventilation  and  the  ventilation  of  courts  and  interior  spaces,  and  thus 
indirectly,  the  ventilation  of  indoor  quarters. 

“ Quite  as  important  as  the  volume  of  the  air  taken  into  buildings  is  its  cleanliness. 
One  of  the  difficulties  in  cities  is  to  obtain  proper  air  inlets  for  ventilation  systems. 
The  amount  of  smoke  and  dust,  foul  odors  on  the  streets,  bad  smells  from  buildings, 
from  passing  vehicles,  from  exposed  refuse  and  from  other  sources  are  matters  prop- 
erly subject  to  the  control  of  the  health  department  but  the  concentration  of  dust  and 
smoke  and  foul  odors  is  greatly  influenced  by  street  ventilation.  The  regulation  of 
buildings  is  a regulation  of  the  amount  of  dilution  of  colors  and  is  therefore  a public 
health  factor.” 

Expo.sure  to  a vitiated  atmosphere,  especially  if  it  is  of  long  duration, 
tends  to  break  down  the  individual’s  power  to  resist  disease.  The  suscepti- 
bility to  respiratory  affections,  tuberculosis,  pneumonia  and  colds,  is  par- 
ticularly increased.  In  the  treatment  of  disease  pure  air  is  of  the  greatest 
curative  value.  The  importance  of  direct  sunlight  *on  health  is  hard  to 
over-estimate.  It  serves  as  a beneficial  stimulent  to  the  nervous  system.  In 


APPROPRIATE  INTENSITY  OF  THE  USE  OF  LAND 


33 


the  destruction  of  bacteria  it  is  better  than  many  artificial  disinfectants.  An 
increased  supply  of  sunshine  in  an  apartment  means  decreased  dampness. 
The  highest  medical  authorities  all  agree  that  the  action  of  the  sun’s  rays 
upon  air  is  prophylactic,  rendering  the  environment  more  healthy.  Good 
natural  light  and  ventilation  alone  are  not  enough,  direct  sunlight  is  also 
important. 

Light  and  air  are  so  important  that  their  provision  should  be  required 
in  every  section  of  the  city  up  to  that  point  at  which  their  benefits  as  to 
that  particular  section  tend  to  be  outweighed  by  other  needs  and  require- 
ments of  city  life.  Under  New  York  City  conditions  the  upper  limit  would 
probably  be  the  single  detached  house  on  a forty  or  fifty-foot  lot  with 
ample  open  spaces  about  it.  This  the  proposed  E district  regulations  would 
in  large  measure  secure.  At  the  other  extreme  the  minimum  provision  of 
light  and  air  assuredly  should  not  be  less  than  that  required  by  the  present 
Tenement  House  Law.  For  large  areas  in  New  York  City  neither  of  the 
above  extremes  furnishes  an  appropriate  standard.  The  one  and  one-half 
and  one  times  height  districts  and  the  C and  D area  districts  will  supply 
the  demand  and  need  for  light  and  air  standards  between  these  two  extremes. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  public  advantage  the  distribution  of  popula- 
tion is  very  important.  IMost  of  the  evils  of  city  life  come  from  congestion 
of  population.  In  precisely  the  measure  that  the  city’s  population  can  be 
distributed  will  those  evils  be  mitigated.  As  the  number  of  families  housed 
per  50-foot  lot  increases : 

(1)  The  provision  of  light  and  air,  so  essential  to  health,  vitality  and 
comfort  decreases. 

(2)  The  opportunities  for  personal  contact  and  thus  for  the  spread  of 
communicable  disease  increase. 

(3)  Noise  and  confusion  incident  to  increased  street  traffic  increases. 

. (4)  Each  family  suffers  more  and  more  from  the  noises  from  neigh- 

boring families. 

(5)  Privacy  is  diminished. 

(6)  The  children  have  less  and  less  opportunity  for  outdoor  play. 

(7)  The  danger  from  fire,  both  to  life  and  property,  is  increased.  ' 

(8)  The  transit  lines  become  more  and  more  congested  during  the 
rush  hours. 

It  is  therefore  essential  in  the  interest  of  the  public  health,  safety, 
comfort,  convenience  and  general  welfare  that  a housing  plan  be  adopted 
that  will  tend  to  distribute  the  population  and  secure  to  each  section  as  much 
light,  air  and  relief  from  congestion  as  is  consistent  with  the  housing  of 
the  entire  population  for  a considerable  period  of  years  within  the  areas 
accessible  and  appropriate  for  housing  purposes. 

In  order  to  provide  the  people  of  the  city  with  the  kinds  of  homes  that 
they  desire,  are  willing  to  pay  for  and  that  will  bring  the  maximum  advan- 
tage from  the  point  of  view  of  public  health  and  safety,  it  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  district  the  city  in  such  a way  as  to  encourage  and  conserve 
particular  types  of  building  in  particular  sections. 


34 


COMMISSION  ON  UUILDINO  DISTRICTS 


Tlic  colUrol  of  the  intensity  of  use  of  land  cannot  safely  be  left  to 
econoinic  forces.  Unless  for  each  section  standards  of  height  and  area 
covered  are  lixed,  the  tendency  will  be  to  build  up  solidly  to  the  extent  per- 
mitted by  the  Tenement  House  Law.  The  real  demand  for  single  family 
houses  and  for  multi-family  houses  with  adequate  yards  and  open  spaces 
will  not  be  supplied  because  builders  and  investors  have  learned  that  such 
develoi)inents  are  in  danger  of  being  ruined  by  the  erection  of  a few  neigh- 
boring buildings  of  a different  and  more  intensive  type. 

Tenants  move  away  from  the  congested  centers  in  order  to  secure  better 
light  and  air.  But  if  after  a few  years  the  bright,  sunny  building  to  which 
they  have  moved  becomes  surrounded  by  buildings  similar  in  height,  yard 
and  court  provisions  to  the  building  in  the  congested  center  in  which  they 
were  formerly  located,  the  desirability  of  the  new  location  for  this  class  of 
tenants  disappears  and  rentable  values  are  likely  to  be  seriously  impaired. 
A proper  districting  plan  will  insure  that  wherever  probable  intensity  of 
demand  will  permit,  a certain  measure  of  the  improved  light  and  air  con- 
ditions that  have  attracted  tenants  to  the  new  location  shall  be  permanently 
retained. 

Private  developers  in  suburban  residence  districts  have  found  that 
in  order  to  attract  purchasers  it  is  necessary  to  place  uniform  restrictions 
on  the  land  against  improvement  by  multi-family  dwellings.  The  surround- 
ings and  neighborhood  are  all-important  in  securing  desirable  home  con- 
ditions. Unless  the  private  residential  character  of  the  section  is  fixed  for 
a considerable  number  of  years  no  one  can  afford  to  build  a home.  This 
method  of  private  restriction  frequently  fails  either  because  the  territory 
covered  is  not  sufficiently  inclusive  or  because  the  restriction  is  limited  to 
a short  term  of  years.  In  recent  years  the  development  of  detached  house 
■flections  ]jas  been  greatly  retarded  by  the  fate  of  many  such  sections  where 
b^'  the  coining  of  a few  apartment  houses  the  entire  section  has  been  de- 
stroyed for  private  house  purposes.  Often  in  such  sections  the  apartment 
house  is  a mere  parasite.  There  would  be  no  economic  reason  for  its  con- 
struction were  it  not  for  the  open  spaces  and  attractive  surroundings  cre- 
ated by  the  private  dwelling  character  of  the  neighborhood. 

Many  men  and  women  would  be  unable  to  stand  the  strain  of  city  life 
were  it  not  possible  for  them  to  live  in  the  more  quiet,  less  densely  popu- 
lated sections.  A detached  house  with  yard  and  garden  has  kept  some  from 
breaking  down  under  the  nervous  strain  and  has  contributed  to  the  efficiency 
and  vitality  of  many  others. 

It  is  important  from  the  standpoint  of  citizenship  as  well  as  from  that 
of  health,  safety  and  comfort,  that  sections  be  set  aside  where  a man  can 
own  his  home  and  have  a little  open  space  about  it.  It  makes  a man  take 
a keener  interest  in  his  neighborhood  and  city.  It  has  undoubted  advan- 
tages in  the  rearing  of  future  citizens.  The  setting  aside  of  sections  for 
this  detached  dwelling  type  is  necessary  in  order  to  retain  within  the  city 
many  citizens  who  would  otherwise  move  to  the  suburbs.  The  retention 


APPROPRIATE  INTENSITY  OF  THE  USE  OF  LAND 


35 


of  the  citizenship  of  a greater  proportion  of  this  class  of  its  business  men 
is  of  great  importance,  not  only  as  regards  the  city’s  taxable  values,  but 
also  as  regards  civic  interest  and  civic  leadership. 


CHAPTER  V— HEIGHT  DISTRICTS 


Tlic  (lislricting  resolution  lierewith  submitted,  together  with  the  ac- 
companying height  district  maps,  ])rovide  for  hve  classes  of  height  dis- 
tricts limiting  the  height  of  the  building  at  the  street  line  to  a varying  mul- 
tiple of  the  street  width.  The  districts  named  in  accordance  with  the  mul- 
tiple at)i)lied  are : one  times  districts,  one  and  one-(|uarter  times  districts,  one 
and  one-half  times  districts,  two  times  districts  and  two  and  one-half  times 
districts. 

Jn  limiting  the  height  of  all  buildings  in  relation  to  the  width  of  the 
streets  on  which  they  abut,  the  Commission  has  adopted  a principle  which  for 
a great  many  years  (since  1885)  has  been  applied  to  tenement  house  con- 
struction in  New  York  City.  The  Tenement  House  Law  limits  the  height 
of  tenement  houses  throughout  the  city  to  one  and  one-half  times  the  street 
width.  It  has  also  been  extensively  applied  in  European  cities.  This  rule 
has  evident  advantages  over  a flat  limitation  that  operates  without  regard 
to  the  width  of  the  street.  A height  limit  based  on  street  width  is  seen  to 
have  a direct  relation  to  street  congestion  and  to  light  and  air  conditions. 

The  Commission  has  modified  the  strict  application  of  the  multiple  of 
street  width  rule  by  providing  that  for  the  purpose  of  computing  the  limit- 
ing height  on  the  multiple  of  street  width  basis  a street  less  than  50  feet 
wide  shall  be  considered  to  be  50  feet  wide,  and  a street  more  than  100 
feet  wide  shall  be  considered  to  be  but  100  feet  wide.  In  other  words,  the 
multiple  of  street  width  rule  is  not  applied  to  very  narrow  streets,  nor  is 
it  applied  to  streets  of  more  than  a prescribed  width.  There  is  for  each 
district  a minimum  height  that  will  be  permitted  and  a maximum  height 
that  may  not  be  exceeded,  regardless  of  the  width  of  the  street.  This  modi- 
fication is  customary  in  building  height  regulations  based  in  general  upon 
street  width.  It  is  clear  that  a general  multiple  if  applied  to  all  narrow 
streets  in  the  business  center  might  seriously  interfere  with  an  appropriate 
and  reasonable  use  of  the  land.  On  the  other  hand  if  the  general  street 
width  multiple  were  applied  without  limit  to  very  wide  streets  and  open 
spaces,  it  would  result  in  an  excessive  and  inappropriate  height  for  a few 
buildings  that  would  be  a serious  injury  to  the  light  of  the  neighbors  on 
the  sides  and  in  the  rear.  Moreover,  in  the  interest  of  safety  in  case  of 
fire  and  of  the  prevention  of  street  congestion  in  the  side  streets,  it  is  ap- 
propriate that  a maximum  height  at  the  street  line  be  established  for  each 
district.  ''  ' ' 

The  multiple  of  street  width  rule  limits  the  height  of  a building  at  the 
street  line  only.  Above  such  height  limit  at  the  street  line,  the  building 
may  be  carried  higher  by  means  of  mansards  or  vertical  walls  provided  such 
extended  portion  is  set  back  in  a prescribed  ratio.  In  the  one  times  district 
the  setback  rule  is  one  foot  horizontally  for  each  two  feet  of  height  above 


HEIGHT  DISTRICTS 


37 


the  prescribed  height  limit  at  the  street  line.  Similarly  in  the  one  and  one- 
quarter  times  district  the  setback  rule  is  one  to  two  and  one-half ; in  the 
one  and  one-half  times  district  1 to  3 ; in  the  two  times  district  1 to  4 and 
in  the  two'  and  one-half  times  district  1 to  5.  This  secures,  except  for 
streets  less  than  50  feet  or  more  than  100  feet  in  width,  a constant  ratio 
between  the  height  of  the  street  wall  at  any  point  and  its  distance  from  the 
center  of  the  street  at  such  height.  In  other  words,  no  part  of  the  building 
may  be  carried  above  a plane  formed  by  the  intersection  of  a horizontal 
line  through  the  center  of  the  street  and  a line  at  right  angles  thereto  drawn 
through  the  limiting  height  at  the  street  line.  This  will  permit  greater 
freedom  of  building  construction  than  a flat  limitation  of  height  and  at  the 
same  time  will  preserve  a uniform  angle  of  light  down  into  the  center  of 
the  street.  (See  Figures  10  and  11.) 

At  the  intersection  of  a narrower  with  a wider  street  the  height  limit 
on  the  wider  street  governs  for  100  feet  back  on  the  narrower  street  if  such 
narrower  street  is  not  more  than  60  feet  wide  (see  Figure  13).  For  each 
one  foot  by  which  such  narrower  street  exceeds  60  feet  the  influence  of 
the  height  limit  on  the  wider  street  extends  one  and  one-half  feet  further 
back  on  the  narrower  street.  Thus,  if  the  narrower  street  is  80  feet  wide 
the  height  limit  of  the  wider  street  will  extend  back  130  feet  on  such  80-foot 
street.  This  will  apply  to  all  buildings  within  the  130-foot  stretch  whether 
they  front  on  the  wider  or  the  narrower  street.  The  distance  back  on  the 
side  street  that  the  height  limit  of  the  wider  street  should  go  depends  on 
light  conditions  on  the  narrower  street  as  influenced  by  its  intersection  with 
the  wider  street  and  by  the  width  of  such  narrower  street  as  compared  with 
that  of  the  wider  street.  Both  of  these  factors  are  taken  into  consideration 
in  the  rule  applied. 

As  an  exception  to  the  general  height  and  setback  rule  special  regula- 
tions are  provided  for  dormers  and  towers.  Above  the  height  limit  on  the 
street  line  dormers  and  head-houses  may,  with  the  approval  of  the  building 
superintendent,  be  erected  on  the  street  line  provided  their  aggregate  front- 
age length  on  the  street  line  be  not  greater  than  60  per  cent,  of  the  street 
frontage  and  provided  that  such  percentage  shall  be  reduced  by  one  for 
every  foot  of  height  above  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line.  This  will 
permit  the  erection  of  one  large  dormer  or  a number  of  small  dormers  in 
a mansard  above  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line.  On  a 100-foot  front- 
age this  will  mean  that  the  dormer  on  the  street  line  at  the  height  limit  can 
be  60  feet  wide ; but  at  a height  of  10  feet  above  the  height  limit  the  dormer 
can  be  only  50  feet  wide ; at  20  feet,  40  feet  wide  and  so  on  until  at  60 
feet  of  height  the  width  of  the  dormer  is  reduced  to  a point.  (See  Figure 
14.)  It  is  also  provided  that  the  percentage  of  the  total  frontage  to  be 
devoted  to  dormers  may  be  increased  by  one  for  each  four  inches  that  such 
dormers  are  set  back  from  the  street  line.  On  a 100-foot  frontage  this  will 
permit  a dormer  set  back  5 feet  from  the  street  line  to  occupy  75  feet  at 
its  base  and  to  come  to  a point  75  feet  above  the  height  limit  at  the  street 


38 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


line.  This  rule  will  weave  in  with  the  general  set-back  provisions  and 
whichever  are  less  drastic  in  any  particular  case  will  govern. 

If  the  area  of  a building  is  reduced  so  that  above  a certain  level  it 
covers  only  25  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot,  a street  wall  above  such  level 
may  be  carried  to  any  height  j)i*ovided  it  is  distant  7-5  feet  from  the  centcr 
of  the  street;  but  for  every  one  per  cent,  of  its  full  possible  length  that 
such  street  wall  is  decreased,  it  may  come  4 inches  nearer  to  the  center  of 
the  street.  This  will  permit  a building  on  an  interior  lot  facing  a street  or 
ot)cn  space  of  150  feet  or  more  in  width  to  build  a tower  across  the  whole 
front  of  the  building  provided  it  does  not  cover  more  than  25  per  cent,  of 
the  lot.  Similarly  on  a street  100  feet  wide  a tower  can  be  built  across 
the  whole  front  of  the  building  provided  it  sets  back  25  feet  from  the  street 
line.  Or  if  a building  has  a 200-foot  frontage  on  a 100-foot  street,  a tower 
with  a 50-foot  frontage  can  be  built  on  the  street  line.  If  a building  is  on 
p,  corner  each  street  wall  of  the  tower  is  governed  by  the  width  of  the 
street  on  which  it  faces.  A tower  on  the  corner  of  a 150-foot  street  and 
a 60-foot  street  would  have  to  set  back  45  feet  from  the  60-foot  street  line. 
If,  however,  the  tower  frontage  on  the  60-foot  street  were  only  one-quarter 
of  the  total  building  frontage  on  such  street  the  tower  could  be  erected 
within  20  feet  of  the  street  line.  This  exception  in  favor  of  towers  applies 
to  street  walls  only  and  other  walls  of  the  tower  must  conform  to  the  gen- 
eral yard  and  court  provisions  wherever  applicable.  (See  Figures  16-21.) 

Where  a building  would  be  pocketed  between  buildings  in  excess  of 
the  prescribed  height  within  50  feet  on  either  side  or  directly  across  the 
street,  its  height  may  be  increased  by  the  average  excess  height  of  such 
surrounding  buildings.  This  will  permit  a building  thus  pocketed  to  secure 
a fair  portion  of  the  light  and  air  that  would  otherwise  be  monopolized  by 
the  buildings  already  erected.  (See  Figures  22,  23.) 

The  only  district  in  which  a height  of  two  and  one-half  times  the  street 
width  is  proposed  is  in  the  office  and  financial  section  in  lower  Manhattan. 
A height  of  two  times  the  street  width  is  allowed  for  the  remaining  por- 
tions of  the  more  intensively  developed  commercial  and  industrial  sections 
in  a broad  belt  through  the  center  of  the  Island  from  the  lower  office  and 
financial  section  to  59th  Street.  An  exception  is  made  for  a portion  of  the 
Fifth  Avenue  section  where  limits  of  one  and  one-quarter  and  one  and  one- 
half  times  the  street  width  are  proposed.  A height  of  two  times  the  street 
width  is  also  allowed  for  a narrow  belt  along  a large  portion  of  the  water- 
front of  Manhattan  and  along  the  East  River  waterfront  of  Brooklyn, 
Queens  and  The  Bronx ; also  for  a small  area  around  the  chief  office  and 
business  center  of  Brooklyn.  In  the  two-times  districts  on  a 60-foot  street 
the  building  can  go  up  to  120  feet  or  about  10  stories  at  the  street  line  and 
above  that  height  by  setting  back  12  feet  can  go  4 stories  higher.  On  a 
100-foot  street  the  building  can  go  up  200  feet,  or  about  16  stories  at  the 
street  line,  and  above  that  height  with  a 12-foot  set  back  can  go  4 stories 
higher. 


HEIGHT  DISTRICTS 


39 


The  high  building  problem  in  lower  Manhattan  was  carefully  studied 
by  the  Heights  of  Buildings  Commission.  The  existing  conditions  and  the 
reasons  for  limitation  are  stated  by  that  Commission  in  part  as  follows : 

“ The  high  building  problem  is  at  present  confined  chiefly  to  a 
comparatively  small  portion  of  the  lower  half  of  the  island  of  Man- 
hattan. The  average  building  height  in  the  Borough  of  Manhattan 
is  4.8  stories.  Ninety  per  cent,  of  the  buildings  do  not  exceed  a height 
of  6 stories.  The  buildings  over  10  stories  in  height  constitute  only 
a little  over  one  per  cent,  of  the  total.  Out  of  a total  of  92,749  build- 
ings, there  are  but  1048  buildings  over  10  stories  in  height ; 90  build- 
ings over  17  stories;  51  buildings  over  20  stories,  and  only  9 build- 
ings over  30  stories. 

“ The  Building  Code  requires  that  all  buildings  over  150  feet  in 
height  be  thoroughly  fireproof.  The  buildings  themselves  cannot 
burn  because  there  is  nothing  combustible  in  their  construction.  All 
high  buildings  are  equipped  with  standpipes  and  ample  tanks  at 
various  levels  and  many  of  them  with  automatic  sprinklers.  Doors 
and  windows  between  rooms  and  between  rooms  and  corridors  are 
fireproof  so  that  fire  can  be  confined  to  a single  room.  There  are 
many  interesting  examples  of  such  fires. 

“ The  fact  remains,  however,  that  tall  buildings  are  not  necessarily 
safe.  The  rooms  are  often  filled  with  highly  inflammable  material. 
Unless  doors  are  closed,  fire  may  easily  spread  to  other  rooms.  The 
draft  up  the  chimney-like  elevator  wells  may  pull  the  flames  across 
the  corridor,  and  the  flames,  fed  by  the  grease  on  the  elevator  guides, 
may  be  carried  to  upper  floors.  Under  such  conditions  the  danger 
of  panic  among  the  employees  of  the  building  would  be  very  real, 
and  the  higher  the  building  the  greater  the  danger. 

“ The  fire  department  cannot  fight  a fire  from  the  outside  more 
than  85  to  100  feet  above  the  ground.  Above  that  they  must  rely  on 
the  standpipes  in  the  building.  If  the  standpipe  does  not  work,  or  if 
the  fire  is  so  near  the  standpipe  as  to  render  its  use  impracticable,  the 
fire  department  becomes  helpless.  No  fatal  fire  in  a modern  high 
building  has  yet  occurred,  but  it  is  not  an  impossibility. 

“ In  case  of  general  panic  or  catastrophe  causing  the  occupants 
of  all  offices  in  all  buildings  in  the  high  building  district  to  seek  the 
streets  at  once,  a serious  situation  would  present  itself.  It  would  be 
impossible  for  all  the  occupants  of  all  the  buildings  abutting  on 
certain  streets  to  move  in  the  street  at  one  time,  even  though  the 
street  were  cleared  of  all  other  traffic,  pedestrian,  vehicular  and  sur- 
face car,  and  absolutely  free  from  all  obstructions  so  that  the  entire 
width  of  the  street  might  be  used.  The  minimum  space  required  by 
a crowd  moving  in  one  direction  is  five  square  feet  per  person.  Com- 
puted in  this  manner,  Broadway  could  hold  but  96.3  per  cent,  of  its 


40 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


occupants;  Trinity  Place  and  Church  Street  86.6  per  cent.;  Nassau 
Street  69.3  per  cent.;  New  Street  44.5  per  cent.,  and  Exchange  Place 
only  37.5  per  cent.  This  being  the  situation  to-day,  the  question 
arises  as  to  what  might  happen  in  case  of  a general  panic  should  the 
entire  district  be  so'lidly  built  up  with  buildings  of  the  present  extreme 
heights. 

“ In  areas  where  high  buildings  are  crowded  together  most  of  the 
rooms  even  on  the  street  front  are  inadequately  lighted  and  many 
are  decidedly  dark.  On  New  Street  and  Exchange  Place,  where  the 
office  buildings  range  from  10  to  22  stories  high,  on  a bright  sunny 
day  at  noon  in  midsummer  it  was  found  that  in  almost  all  of  the  street 
rooms  artiihcial  light  was  being  used  next  to  the  windows.  The 
conditions  in  the  interior  courts  in  parts  of  the  tall  building  district 
are  even  worse. 

“ Even  with  modern  artificial  lighting  of  the  most  approved  type, 
the  dark  offices  have  caused  a great  deal  of  eye  strain.  Nothing  but 
adequate  natural  light  seems  to  prevent  it.  Tuberculosis  experts 
testified  to  the  Commission  that  they  had  found  many  cases  of  tuber- 
culosis directly  traceable  to  working  in  dark  offices.  A noticeable 
increase  in  sick  leave  has  been  found  among  the  employees  of  firms 
that  have  moved  from  light  to  dark  offices. 

‘‘  A number  of  streets  in  the  high  building  district  are  already  so 
congested  that  pedestrian  and  vehicular  traffic  is  greatly  impeded. 
Assuming  that  pedestrians  will  use  sidewalk  space  only  and  will  move 
in  one  direction  only,  there  is  room  on  Trinity  Place  and  Church 
Street  for  but  56  per  cent,  of  the  occupants  of  the  buildings  located 
on  those  streets ; on  Broadway,  50  per  cent. ; on  Nassau  Street,  32 
per  cent.,  and  on  New  Street,  but  19  per  cent.  If  these  same  streets 
should  be  uniformly  built  up  to  an  average  height  of  30  stories,  the 
above  percentages  would  be  reduced  to'  26  per  cent,  on  Broadway ; 
20  per  cent,  on  Trinity  Place  and  Church  Street;  11.9  per  cent,  on 
Nassau  Street;  8.9  per  cent,  on  New  Street,  and  8.4  per  cent,  on 
Exchange  Place.  It  is  quite  clear  that  under  such  conditions  the 
street  capacity  would  be  entirely  inadequate  to  take  care  of  the 
morning,  afternoon  and  noon  hour  crowds.” 

Chief  Engineer  Lewis  in  his  testimony  before  the  Commission  spoke 
of  the  possible  fatal  consequences  from  panic  in  congested  lower  Manhattan. 
Mr.  Lewis  said:  “It  is  obvious  to  anyone  that  in  certain  portions  of  the 
city,  notably  in  lower  Manhattan,  the  enormous  day  population  of  the  office 
buildings,  most  of  whom  come  to  their  work  in  the  morning  and  leave  in 
the  afternoon  within  a very  limited  time,  now  overtaxes  the  public  streets 
and,  while  we  are  reasonably  free  from  earthquake  shocks,  or  even  tremors, 
you  will  recall  that  in  1884  and  again  in  1886  there  were  violent  vibrations 
which  caused  a very  panicky  feeling.  You  may  remember  the  explosion  in 


HEIGHT  DISTRICTS 


41 


the  Tarrant  Building,  perhaps  twenty  years  ago,  which  created  a great  panic 
in  the  neighborhood.  It  is  easy  to  see  what  would  happen  if,  in  the  office 
building  district  down  town,  a violent  explosion  or  earthquake  tremor  were 
to  occur,  which  would  result  in  a mad  rush  from  office  buildings  to  the 
streets.  The  panic  in  the  streets  would  be  almost  inconceivable,  and  would, 
under  existing  conditions,  be  about  as  serious  and  fatal  in  its  results  as  those 
which  occur  when  people  try  to  leave  a theatre  in  case  of  an  alarm  of  fire.” 

Tenement  and  apartment  houses  throughout  the  city  are  now  limited  to 
a height  of  times  the  street  width.  The  proposed  plan  takes  the  1^- 
times  rule  of  the  Tenement  House  Law  and  applies  it  to  substantially  all 
the  residential  portions  of  the  city  that  are  now  intensively  built  up  and  to  all 
the  commercial,  industrial  and  waterfront  sections  not  included  in  the  2]/2  or 
2 times  rule  and  where  a somewhat  intensive  future  development  is  antici- 
pated. (See  Figure  12.) 

Other  residential  sections  where  a fairly  intensive  apartment  house 
development  seems  not  inappropriate,  are  placed  in  the  ll'4-hmes  district. 
This  will  permit  a 6-story  elevator  apartment  on  the  ordinary  60-foot  street 
and  a 10-story  apartment  on  a 100-foot  street.  By  taking  advantage  of  the 
set-back  provisions,  two  or  more  stories  of  additional  height  may  be  secured. 
Under  the  1^-times  rule  of  the  Tenement  House  Law  9-story  apartments 
are  now  built  in  certain  sections  of  Manhattan  on  the  60-foot  streets.  The 
1^  districts  will  prevent  the  development  of  this  type,  and  this  will  be  a 
distinct  gain  from  the  point  of  view  of  better  light  and  air  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  population. 

All  other  portions  of  the  city,  including  those  in  which  a 2,  3,  4 or 
5 story  development  seems  appropriate,  are  placed  in  the  one-times  district. 
This  will  permit  of  a 5-story  building  on  a 60-foot  street  and  an  8 or  9 story 
building  on  a 100-foot  street.  By  taking  advantage  of  the  set-back  pro- 
visions, one  or  more  stories  of  additional  height  may  be  secured. 


CHAPTER  VI— AREA  DISTRICTS 


'J'lie  districting  resolution  lierewitli  submitted,  together  with  the  accom- 
panying area  district  maps  provide  for  five  classes  of  area  districts,  A,  B, 
C,  1)  and  Jf,  with  varying  regulations  as  to  size  of  yards,  courts  and  other 
o])en  spaces. 

Except  in  A districts,  any  building  that  is  back  to  back  with  the  rear  of 
another  jiroperty  and  is  more  than  55  feet  back  from  the  nearest  street  must 
have  a rear  yard.  The  requirement  for  a rear  yard  is  reciprocal.  No 
building  is  rccjuired  to  have  a rear  yard  unless  a similar  obligation  could  be 
imposed  with  respect  to  any  building  hereafter  erected  on  the  plot  immedi- 
ately behind  such  yard.  The  55-foot  exemption  is  inserted  on  the  assump- 
tion that  a building  running  back  but  55  feet  from  the  street  can  be  lighted 
in  its  most  used  parts  directly  from  the  street.  A corner  building  is  seldom 
back  to  back  with  the  rear  portion  of  another  building  and  consequently 
would  seldom  require  a rear  yard.  (See  Figure  34.)  If,  however,  a build- 
ing runs  through  the  middle  of  a block  from  street  to  street  and  between 
lots  for  which  rear  yards  are  required  it  will  be  required  to  leave  uncovered 
in  some  part  of  its  extent  courts  equivalent  in  size  to  the  space  that  its 
neighbors  are  required  to  devote  to  rear  yards.  (See  Figure  36.)  The 
depth  of  the  rear  yard  at  its  lowest  level  must  be  at  least  10  per  cent,  of  the 
depth  of  the  lot,  but  need  not  in  any  case  exceed  10  feet  at  such  level.  For 
any  building  not  within  a residence  district  the  rear  yard  may  start  from  a 
level  18  feet  above  the  curb.  This  permits  all  buildings  in  the  business, 
unrestricted  and  undetermined  districts  to  cover  the  entire  lot  for  the  first 
floor.  For  any  building  in  a residence  district  the  rear  yard  must  start  from 
the  curb  level,  except  that  the  usual  one-story  accessory  buildings  may  cover 
40  per  cent,  of  the  prescribed  area  of  the  yard. 

In  addition  to  the  percentage  requirement  as  to  the  depth  of  the  yard 
at  its  lowest  level,  the  yard  must  increase  in  depth  with  the  height  of  the 
yard  being  not  less  than  one  inch,  two  inches,  three  inches,  four  inches  or 
five  inches  in  depth  for  each  one  foot  of  its  height,  according  as  it  is  located 
in  the  A,  B,  C,  D or  E district.  The  increased  depth  of  yard  required  as 
the  building  increases  in  height  may  be  secured  by  stepping  back  at  each 
story  or  at  each  two,  three,  five  or  more  stories.  The  purpose  of  the  regula- 
tion is  to  preserve  a reasonable  angle  of  light  for  the  lighting  of  the  lower 
windows. 

In  every  building  hereafter  constructed  in  which  a room  in  which  per- 
sons live,  sleep  or  work  receives  its  light  and  air  in  whole  or  in  part  from 
a court  or  yard,  at  least  one  court  or  yard  having  a window  opening  from 
such  room  shall  be  of  the  size  prescribed  for  a required  court.  The  least 
horizontal  dimension  of  a required  court  shall  be  not  less  than  four  feet. 
The  court  must  increase  in  width  with  the  height  of  its  enclosing  walls, 
being  not  less  than  one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  one  foot  of  height,  in 


AREA  DISTRICTS 


43 


an  A cr  B district,  one  and  onc-half  inches  in  a C district,  two  inches  in 
a I)  district  and  two  and  one-half  inches  in  an  E district.  This  gives  an 
Ollier  court  with  a least  dimension  at  any  height  just  one-half  as  great  as 
that  for  a required  yard  at  the  same  height.  The  area  of  an  inner  court  at 
any  height  must  be  not  less  than  the  square  of  the  depth  of  a required  yard 
at  such  height.  The  length  of  such  required  inner  court  for  its  minimum 
area  may  not  be  more  than  twice  its  width.  (See  Fig.  38).  The  width 
of  an  outer  court  besides  being  governed  by  the  height  of  such  court  is 
also  governed  by  the  length  of  the  court.  An  outer  court  gets  its  light  and 
air  both  from  above  and  from  the  end  of  such  court  opening  on  the  yard 
or  street.  It  is  appropriate  therefore  that  the  width  of  the  outer  court  should 
bear  some  relation  to  its  length.  An  outer  court  accordingly  must  increase 
in  width  with  the  length  of  such  court  being  not  less  than  one  inch  in  least 
dimension  for  each  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end  in  an  A district, 
one  and  one-half  inches  in  a B or  C district,  two  inches  in  a D district  and 
two  and  one-half  inches  in  an  E district. 

The  A district  is  essentially  a warehouse  district  and  is  confined  to  a 
narrow  belt  along  the  navigable  waterfront  and  along  the  rail  terminals. 
Light  is  not  required  for  most  storage  buildings.  The  A district  is  estab- 
lished so  that  storage  buildings  that  do  not  require  light  and  air  will  not 
need  to  provide  unnecessary  open  spaces.  The  Districting  plan  makes  it 
possible  to  give  such  buildings  a place  to  .ocate  where  they  will  be  exempt 
from  all  yard  requirements.  Any  building  in  an  A district,  however,  that 
is  required  to  have  a court  to  light  its  workrooms  must  provide  courts  of 
at  least  one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  each  foot  of  height,  as  now  provided 
in  the  Building  Code.  This  does  not  mean  that  a building  covering  the 
entire  plot  may  not  be  located  outside  of  an  A district,  for  in  a B,  C or  D 
district  a department  store,  for  example,  not  back  to  back  with  another 
building  and  with  no  rooms  that  have  to  face  on  a legal  court,  could  occupy 
100  per  cent,  of  the  lot  for  its  entire  height. 

In  a B district  rear  yards  must  be  at  least  two  inches  in  least  dimen- 
sion for  each  one  foot  of  height,  and  outer  courts  and  side  yards  at  least 
one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height.  This  will  require 
for  all  buildings  slightly  deeper  yards  above  90  feet  in  height  than  are 
now  required  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  This  will  only  affect  elevator 
apartments  above  eight  or  nine  stories  in  height  fronting  on  the  long  side 
of  blocks,  and  the  increased  width  of  yard  will  not  have  to  be  carried  down 
to  the  ground,  but  can  be  provided  in  a set  back  above  the  90-foot  limit. 
In  the  B districts  the  important  change,  as  compared  with  existing  con- 
ditions, is  the  requirement  of  a rear  yard  for  business  and  industrial  build- 
ings as  well  as  tenements  wherever  they  are  back  to  back  with  the  rear  of 
another  property.  The  rear  yard  for  a building  120  feet  high  or  about 
10  stories  would  be  20  feet  in  depth,  and  for  a building  150  feet  high, 
or  about  12  stories,  would  be  25  feet  in  depth.  This  is  not  in  excess  of  the 
best  economic  standards  and  practice,  and  will  greatly  improve  light  and 


44 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


air  conditions  in  the  loft  building  and  office  building  sections  of  the  city. 
In  case  the  yard  started  18  feet  above  the  curb,  as  permitted  for  buildings 
not  in  residence  districts,  the  width  of  the  yard  at  any  height  above  the 
curb  would  be  three  feet  less  than  indicated  in  the  above  examples.  (See 
Figure  29). 

In  the  C districts  rear  yards  for  all  buildings  must  be  at  least  three 
inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and  outer  courts  and 
side  yards  must  be  at  least  one  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension  for 
each  one  foot  of  height.  The  prescribed  minimum  size  of  yards  and  courts 
remain  about  the  same  as  under  the  Tenement  House  Law  up  to  and  includ- 
ing hve  stories  in  height.  Above  that  height,  however,  they  gradually  become 
more  stringent  than  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  In  a building  five 
stories,  or  approximately  56  feet  in  height,  a rear  yard  under  these  pro- 
visions would  have  to  be  14  feet  wide,  or  two  feet  wider  than  required 
under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  An  outer  court  would  have  to  be  seven 
feet  wide,  or  one  foot  wider  than  required  under  the  Tenement  House  Law. 
iriowever,  as  buildings  on  interior  lots  are  limited  to  70  per  cent,  of  the 
lot  under  the  Tenement  House  Law,  this  is  apt  to  require  increases  in  the 
minimum  depths  and  widths  of  courts  and  yards,  and  for  most  floor  plans 
and  plots  a five-story  tenement  house  covering  70  per  cent,  of  the  lot 
could  be  built  under  the  C district  regulations.  On  account  of  difficulties 
in  planning  suitable  buildings  for  small  plottages  a special  exception  is 
made  in  the  court  requirements  for  a lot  30  feet  or  less  in  width.  On  such 
lots  outer  and  inner  courts  are  subject  to  the  regulations  provided  for 
such  courts  in  the  B districts.  (See  Figure  30). 

For  all  buildings  in  a D district  rear  yards  must  .be  four  inches  in 
least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and  courts  and  side  yards  two 
inches  in  least  dimension  for  one  foot  of  height.  A building  on  an  interior 
lot  in  a residence  district  may  not  cover  more  than  60  per  cent,  of  the  area 
of  the  lot : on  a corner  lot  it  may  cover  80  per  cent,  of  such  area.  In  a 
residence  district  the  depth  of  a rear  yard  at  -the  curb  level  shall  be  20 
per  cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot,  but  need  not  exceed  20  feet  at  such  level. 
The  restrictions  provided  for  the  D districts  are  especially  appropriate  for 
one  and  two-family  house  districts,  especially  where  houses  occur  in  rows. 
They  are  also  appropriate  for  multi-family  houses,  provided  they  are  built 
with  more  adequate  courts  and  open  spaces  than  is  now  customary.  The 
minimum  dimensions  of  yards  and  courts  are  double  those  required  for 
buildings  in  the  B districts.  A tenement  or  an  apartment  house  on  an 
interior  lot  in  a D district  covering  60  per  cent  of  its  lot,  four  stories,  or 
44  feet  in  height,  would  have  to  have  a yard  20  feet  deep  and  an  outer 
court  at  least  seven  feet  four  inches  wide.  For  lots  of  30  feet  or  less  in 
width  outer  and  inner  courts  are  subject  to  the  less  restrictive  regulations 
provided  for  such  courts  in  C districts.  (See  Figure  31). 

The  F district  regulations  are  particularly  appropriate  for  detached 
or  semi-detached  houses  on  lots  40  feet  or  more  in  width.  In  a residence 


AREA  DISTRICTS 


45 


district  a building  on  an  interior  lot  with  its  porches,  wings  and  accessory 
buildings  may  not  occupy  for  the  first  story  more  than  50  per  cent,  of  the 
area  of  the  lot,  and  may  not  exceed  30  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot  above 
the  first  story.  For  a corner  lot  these  percentages  are  increased  to  70  per 
cent,  and  40  per  cent,  respectively.  For  all  buildings  rear  yards  shall  be 
at  least  five  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and  courts 
and  side  yards  at  least  two  and  one-half  inches  for  each  foot  of  height. 
For  a lot  50  feet  or  less  in  width  courts  and  side  yards  shall  be  not  less 
than  two  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  foot  of  height.  In  a residence 
district  the  depth  of  the  rear  yard  at  the  curb  level  shall  be  at  least  25  per 
cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot,  but  need  not  exceed  25  feet.  If  the  building 
is  set  back  from  the  street  the  required  depth  of  the  rear  yard  may  be 
correspondingly  decreased,  but  not  below  ten  feet.  On  at  least  one  side 
of  every  building  in  a residence  district  there  shall  be  a side  yard  along 
the  lot  line  for  the  full  depth  of  the  lot.  For  any  building  not  within  a 
residence  district  the  depth  of  the  required  rear  yard  at  its  lowest  level 
must  be  at  least  15  per  cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot,  but  need  not  exceed 
15  feet  at  such  level.  (See  Figure  32). 

It  is  so  important  to  secure  some  segregated  open  space  for  the  joint 
play  and  recreational  use  of  the  residents  of  every  section  that  is  built  up 
with  tenement  or  apartment  houses  that  it  is  well  worth  while  to  grant 
developers  the  option  of  building  under  less  restrictive  provisions  as  to 
courts  and  yards  if  as  a substitute  they  supply  areas  suitable  for  recreational 
use.  An  arrangement  is  accordingly  provided  whereby  an  individual  de- 
veloper or  group  of  property  owners  in  a D or  C district  can  by  setting 
aside  10  per  cent,  of  their  land  for  joint  recreational  use,  be  relieved  of 
the  court  and  yard  requirements  of  the  district  in  which  they  are  situated 
and  have  the  right  to  follow  the  requirements  of  the  next  less  restricted 
district.  The  10  per  cent,  set  aside  for  common  recreational  use  must  be 
equal  to  at  least  5,000  square  feet  and  must  be  at  least  40  feet  in  its  least 
dimension.  This  common  space  may  be  left  in  the  center  of  the  block  or 
it  may  be  made  up  of  any  lots  in  the  block  or  in  an  adjoining  block  that 
are  approved  by  the  superintendent  of  buildings  as  suitable  for  the  joint 
recreational  use  of  the  residents.  (See  Figure  33). 


CHAPTER  VII— FUTURE  CHANGE  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF 

DISTRICTING  PLAN 


The  Legislature  by  a recent  amendment  to  the  districting  provisions 
of  the  Charter  (sections  242a,  242b)  has  provided  a definite  method,  under 
appropriate  safeguards,  by  which  the  Board  of  Estimate  may  amend  and 
supplement  any  general  districting  plan  that  it  may  adopt.  This  amendment 
was  drafted  by  the  Commission  and  approved  by  the  Board  of  Estimate. 
It  is  essential  to  the  success  and  future  development  of  any  districting  plan. 

The  districting  plan  submitted  has  been  evolved  after  a careful  study 
of  existing  conditions  and  tendencies  and  a careful  estimate  of  probable 
future  needs  and  requirements,  both  of  the  city  as  a whole  and  of  each 
particular  section.  There  is  no  thought,  however,  that  the  plan  now  pro^ 
posed  can  be  complete  and  final  for  all  time.  There  are  doubtless  errors 
and  omissions  that  will  be  brought  out  only  by  actual  operation.  Moreover 
it  is  recognized  that  any  plan  of  city  building  must  be  modified  and  supple- 
mented with  the  growth  of  the  city  and  the  changes  in  social  and  economic 
conditions  due  to  the  progress  of  invention  and  discovery. 

“No  limit  can  be  set  to  the  growth  and  expansion  of  the  city.  No 
amount  of  planning  can  avoid  the  necessity  for  a considerable  amount  of 
reconstruction  and  change.  Regardless  of  the  requirements  of  an  increas- 
ing population,  the  city  structure  must  change  to  conform  to  the  changes 
in  the  economic  and  industrial  world.  The  city  is  but  an  expression  of 
the  existing  economic,  commercial,  industrial,  social  and  political  organiza- 
tion. When  invention  and  discovery  are  changing  the  methods  of  work 
and  of  living  throughout  the  world,  it  is  idle  to  think  tjiat  we  can  so  judge 
the  future  that  our  present  plans  for  the  city’s  development  will  not  require 
change  and  modification.  The  ‘ once  for  all  ’ method  of  city  planning  is 
therefore  impractical.  We  cannot  adopt  a plan  and  make  that  the  Pro- 
crustean mold  for  all  future  time.  The  plan  must  develop  and  change 
with  the  advance  of  civilization.  City  planning  to  be  efifectual  must  be 
sustained  and  continuous.  It  is  never  completed.”  ^ 

Even  now  it  is  clear  that  the  present  plan  must  be  supplemented  and 
changed  when  plans  for  certain  fundamental  factors  affecting  the  physical 
structure  of  the  city  have  been  definitely  worked  out.  Among  these  factors 
are,  a comprehensive  plan  of  port  and  terminal  development,  a plan  of  park 
development  in  Brooklyn,  Queens  and  Richmond,  a plan  for  future  exten- 
sions and  surface  line  feeders  for  the  dual  subway  system. 

Moreover  the  present  plan  has  been  developed  along  quite  broad 
general  lines  with  the  belief  that  after  its  adoption  it  would  be  further  sup- 

^ Robert  H.  Whitten,  in  Development  and  Present  Status  of  City  Pianning  in  New  York 
City,  p.  18. 


FUTURE  CHANGE  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  DISTRICTING  PLAN 


47 


plemented  by  more  restrictive  provisions  in  various  areas.  A more  intensive 
study  of  particular  sections  will  doubtless  show  that  some  streets  now  unre- 
stricted or  restricted  to  business  may  with  advantage  be  included  in  the 
residence  class.  The  owners  interested  will  doubtless  in  many  cases  petition 
that  this  be  done.  Similarly  and  even  to  a greater  extent  the  area  districts 
contained  in  the  present  plan  will  be  supplemented  in  order  to  conserve 
existing  developments  and  extend  the  safeguard  of  the  E and  D restrictions 
to  other  sections. 

The  method  of  amendment  contained  in  the  proposed  districting  reso- 
lution is  as  follows : “ Whenever  the  owners  of  50  per  cent,  or  more  of 
the  frontage  in  any  district  or  part  thereof  shall  present  a petition  duly 
signed  and  acknowledged  to  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment 
requesting  an  amendment,  supplement,  change  or  repeal  of  the  regulations 
prescribed  for  such  district  or  part  thereof,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this 
Board  to  vote  upon  said  petition  within  90  days  after  the  filing  of  the 
same  by  the  petitioners  with  the  Secretary  of  this  Board.  If,  however,  a 
protest  against  such  amendment,  supplement  or  change  be  presented,  duly 
signed  and  acknowledged  by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent,  or  more  of  the 
frontage  proposed  to  be  altered,  or  by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent,  of  the 
frontage  immediately  in  the  rear  thereof,  or  by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent, 
of  the  frontage  directly  opposite  the  frontage  proposed  to  be  altered,  such 
amendment  shall  not  be  passed  except  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  Board.” 

The  above  provisions  in  relation  to  a protest  of  20  per  cent,  of  frontage 
affected  are  identical  with  the  provisions  for  amendment  added  by  the 
recent  Legislature  to  the  districting  sections  of  the  Charter.  Under  this 
method  it  will  be  possible  for  the  owners  in  any  block  frontage  between 
two  intersecting  streets  to  petition  for  the  kind  of  restriction  that  will  best 
conserve  the  type  of  improvement  most  suitable  for  that  block.  We  believe 
that  this  process  of  amending,  supplementing  and  perfecting  the  general 
plan  is  essential  to  its  full  success. 

Under  the  districting  resolution  submitted  the  enforcement  of  the 
plan  is  vested  in  the  superintendent  of  buildings  in  each  borough,  the  fire 
commissioner  and  the  tenement  house  commissioner  under  the  rules  and 
regulations  of  the  Board  of  Standards  and  Appeals.  The  chief  control 
will  be  exercised  through  the  building  permit  and  the  certificate  of  occupancy 
issued  by  the  superintendent  of  buildings.  The  fire  commissioner’s  juris- 
diction will  be  confined  to  subsequent  enforcement  of  provisions  in  relation 
to  the  use  of  buildings.  The  tenement  house  commissioner  will  have  juris- 
diction over  the  application  of  the  provisions  of  the  resolution  to  tenement 
houses. 

The  future  amendment  and  development  of  the  districting  plan  will 
doubtless  entail  some  added  work  for  the  Board  of  Estimate.  It  should 
be  carried  on  as  part  of  the  general  work  of  comprehensive  planning  that 
the  Board’s  Committee  on  the  City  Plan  has  in  hand.  It  is  very  important 
for  the  permanent  success  of  the  districting  plan  that  all  detailed  amend- 


48 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


ments  should  be  correlated  with  a comprehensive  plan  of  city  growth  and 
development. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 
AND  RESTRICTIONS, 

Edward  M.  Bassett,  Chairman, 
Lawson  Purdy,  Vice-Chairman, 
Edward  C.  Blum, 

James  E.  Clonin, 

Otto  M.  Eidlitz, 

Burt  L.  Fenner, 

Edward  R.  Hardy, 

Richard  W.  Lawrence, 

7\lrick  H.  Man, 

Alfred  E.  Marling,  . 

George  T.  Mortimer, 

J.  F.  Smith, 

Walter  Stabler, 

Franklin  S.  Tomlin, 

George  C.  Whipple, 

William  G.  Wtli.cox. 


Robert  H.  Whitten,  Secretary. 


APPENDIX  I— CHARTER  PROVISIONS 


Sections  242a  and  242b  of  Greater  New  York  Charter,  as  Enacted  by 
Chapter  470  of  Laws  of  1914  and  Amended  by  Chapter  497 
of  Laws  of  1910 

§ 242-a.  The  board  of  estimate  and  apportionment  shall  have  power  to 
regulate  and  limit  the  height  and  bulk  of  buildings  hereafter  erected  and  to 
regulate  and  determine  the  area  of  yards,  courts  and  other  open  spaces. 
The  board  may  divide  the  city  into  districts  of  such  number,  shape  and  area 
as  it  may  deem  best  suited  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  this  section.  The 
regulations  as  to  the  height  and  bulk  of  buildings  and  the  area  of  yards, 
courts  and  other  open  spaces  shall  be  uniform  for  each  class  of  buildings 
throughout  each  district.  The  regulations  in  one  or  more  districts  may 
differ  from  those  in  other  districts.  Such  regulations  shall  be  designed  to 
secure  safety  from  fire  and  other  dangers  and  to  promote  the  public  health 
and  welfare,  including,  so  far  as  conditions  may  permit,  provision  for  ade- 
quate light,  air  and  convenience  of  access.  The  board  shall  pay  reasonable 
regard  to  the  character  of  buildings  erected  in  each  district,  the  value  of  the 
land  and  the  use  to  which  it  may  be  put  to  the  end  that  such  regulations  may 
promote  public  health,  safety  and  welfare  and  the  most  desirable  use  for 
which  the  land  of  each  district  may  be  adapted  and  may  tend  to  conserve  the 
value  of  buildings  and  enhance  the  value  of  land  throughout  the  city.  The 
board  shall  appoint  a commission  to  recommend  the  boundaries  of  districts 
and  appropriate  regulations  to  be  enforced  therein.  Such  commission  shall 
make  a tentative  report  and  hold  public  hearings  thereon  at  such  times  and 
places ‘as  said  board  shall  require  before  submitting  its  final  report.  Said 
board  shall  not  determine  the  boundaries  of  any  district  nor  impose  any 
regulation  until  after  the  final  report  of  a commission  so  appointed.  After 
such  final  report  said  board  shall  afford  persons  interested  an  opportunity 
to  be  heard  at  a time  and  place  to  be  specified  in  a notice  of  hearing  to  be 
published  for  ten  consecutive  days  in  the  City  Record.  The  board  may 
from  time  to  time  after  public  notice  and  hearing  amend,  supplement  or 
change  said  regulations  or  districts  but  in  case  a protest  against  a proposed 
amendment,  supplement  or  change  be  presented,  duly  signed  and  acknowl- 
edged by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum  or  more  of  the  frontage  proposed 
to  be  altered,  or  by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum  of  the  frontage  imme- 
diately in  the  rear  thereof,  or  by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum  of  the 
frontage  directly  opposite  the  frontage  proposed  to  be  altered,  such  amend- 
ment shall  not  be  passed  except  by  a unanimous  vote  of  the  board. 

§ 242-b.  The  board  of  estimate  and  apportionment  may  regulate  and 
restrict  the  location  of  trades  and  industries  and  the  location  of  buildings 
designed  for  specified  uses,  and  may  divide  the  city  into  districts  of  such 
number,  shape  and  area  as  it  may  deem  best  suited  to  carry  out  the  purposes 
of  this  section.  For  each  such  district  regulations  may  be  imposed  designat- 
ing the  trades  and  industries  that  shall  be  excluded  or  subjected  to  special 
regulations  and  designating  the  uses  for  which  buildings  may  not  be  erected 
or  altered.  Such  regulations  shall  be  designed  to  promote  the  public  health, 
safety  and  general  welfare.  The  board  shall  give  reasonable  consideration, 
among  other  things  'to  the  character  of  the  district,  its  peculiar  suitability  for 
particular  uses,  the  conservation  of  property  values,  and  the  direction  of 
building  development  in  accord  with  a well-consid-ered  plan.  The  board 


50 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


shall  appoint  a commission  to  recommend  the  boundaries  of  districts  and 
appropriate  regulations  and  restrictions  to  be  imposed  therein.  Such  com- 
mission shall  make  a tentative  report  and  hold  public  hearings  thereon  before 
submitting  its  final  report  at  such  time  as  said  board  shall  require.  Said 
board  shall  not  determine  the  boundaries  of  any  district  nor  impose  any 
regulations  or  restrictions  until  after  the  final  report  of  a commission  so 
appointed.  After  such  final  report  said  board  shall  afford  persons  interested 
an  opportunity  to  be  heard  at  a time  and  place  to  be  specified  in  a notice  of 
hearing  to  be  published  for  ten  consecutive  days  in  the  City  Record.  The 
board  may  from  time  to  time  after  public  notice  and  hearing  amend,  supple- 
ment or  change  said  regulations  or  districts  but  in  case  a protest  against  a 
proposed  amendment,  supplement  or  change  be  presented,  duly  signed  and 
acknowledged  by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum  or  more  of  the  frontage 
proposed  to  be  altered,  or  by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum  of  the  front- 
age immediately  in  the  rear  thereof,  or  by  the  owners  of  twenty  per  centum 
of  the  frontage  directly  opposite  the  frontage  proposed  to  be  altered,  such 
amendment  shall  not  be  passed  except  by  a unanimous  vote  of  the  board. 


APPENDIX  II— DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 

(Draft  of  June  2,  1916) 

A Resolution  Regulating  the  Height  and  Bulk  of  Buildings,  the  Area  of 
Courts  and  Yards,  the  Location  of  Trades  and  Industries 
and  the  Location  of  Buildings  Designed  for  Specified 
Uses  and  Establishing  the  Boundaries  of 
Districts  for  Such  Purposes 

Be  it  resolved  by  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment : 

Section  1.  Definitions:  Certain  words  in  this  resolution  are  defined 

for  the  purposes  thereof  as  follows : Words  used  in  the  present  tense  include 
the  future;  the  singular  number  includes  the  plural  and  the  plural  the 
singular  ; the  word  “ lot  ” includes  the  word  “ plot  ” ; the  word  “ building  ” 
includes  the  word  “ structure.” 

(a)  For  the  purposes  of  Articles  II  and  III  a ‘‘  residential  building  ” 
is  any  building  or  part  of  a building  within  a “ residence  district,”  as 
shown  on  the  accompanying  use  district  maps.  A “ non-residential  build- 
ing ” is  any  building  or  part  of  a building  within  a “ business,”  an  unre- 
stricted ” or  an  “ undetermined  district,”  as  shown  on  the  accompanying 
use  district  maps. 

Note. — For  the  purpose  of  computing  area  restrictions,  a residential  building 
would  be  any  building  in  a residence  district,  as  defined  in  Section  11  of  this  resolution. 
This  would  mean  that  a church,  school,  hospital,  or  hotel  on  a residence  street,  as 
designated  on  the  accompanying  use  district  maps,  would  have  the  same  size  yards  and 
courts  as  an  apartment  house  or  dwelling.  On  the  other  hand  an  apartment  house  or 
dwelling  in  a business  or  unrestricted  district,  as  designated  on  the  accompanying  use 
district  maps,  would  have  the  same  size  yards  and  courts  as  the  surrounding  business 
or  factory  buildings. 

In  several  of  the  classes  there  is  no  difference  as  between  residential  and  non- 
residential  buildings  in  the  yard,  court  and  height  restrictions  except  that  in  business 
or  unrestricted  districts,  apartment  or  tenement  houses  would  be  allowed  to  have  stores 
covering  the  whole  of  the  ground  floor  wherever  permitted  by  the  Tenement  House 
Law,  whereas  in  the  residence  districts  these  yards  and  courts  would  have  to  run 
down  to  the  ground  level. 

{h)  A “ factory  is  a building  or  portion  of  a building  in  which  six  or 
more  persons  are  employed  in  any  process  or  part  of  a process  of  trans- 
forming or  converting  raw  material,  partly  wrought  material  or  imperfect 
material  into  forms  suitable  for  use. 

(c)  The  “curb”  is  the  mean  curb  level  at  that  front  of  the  building 
which  faces  on  the  street  of  greatest  width,  or,  if  the  greatest  width  occurs 
on  more  than  one  of  the  streets  on  which  the  building  faces,  the  mean  curb 
level  at  that  front  of  the  building  which  faces  on  the  street  of  greatest  width 
and  having  the  highest  curb.  Where  no  street  grade  has  been  legally 
established,  or  the  building  does  not  adjoin  the  street,  the  average  level  of 


52 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  f)lSTRICTS 


all  the  "round  adjoining  such  building  shall  be  taken,  with  the  approval  of 
the  hnildini:^  superintendent,  as  the  eciiiivalent  of  the  curb  level. 

Note, — This  definition  of  curb  level  is  the  same  as  the  one  in  the  new  Building 
Code.  Jt  differs  from  the  Tenement  House  Law  in  that,  under  the  latter,  it  might  be 
])ossible  in  certain  cases  to  get  in  two  stories  more  than  could  be  put  in  under  this 
definition.  It  will  be  observed,  however,  that  in  the  last  clause  of  section  1,  subsection 
(e),  the  definition  of  curl)  in  the  Tenement  House  Law  will  govern  wherever  the  build- 
ing comes  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  The  last  sentence  of  section  (c)  makes 
it  possible  for  a building  on  a terrace  high  above  the  street  to  regulate  its  height 
and  yards  and  courts  from  the  ground  level  immediately  about  the  building.  If  a 
building  faces  on  a 60-foot  street  and  two  100-foot  streets,  the  height  of  the  building 
may  be  determined  from  the  higher  of  the  two  100-foot  streets. 

(d)  A “street  wall”  of  a building'  at  any  height  above  the  curb  is 
the  wall  of  the  building  nearest  to  the  street  line  and  approximately  parallel 
to  it. 

Note. — A street  wall  as  thus  defined  does  not  have  to  be  on  the  street  line.  Here 
the  street  line  is  the  dividing  line  between  the  public  legal  street  and  the  private  property 
regardless  of  whether  there  is  a set-back  easement  or  not.  A street  wall  may  be  set  any 
number  of  feet  back  from  the  street  line  provided  it  is  approximately  parallel  to  it  and 
provided  it  is  the  nearest  wall  to  the  street.  If  a street  wall  or  a portion  of  a street 
wall  is  set  at  an  angle  with  the  street,  it  should  be  considered  as  set  back  at  its  average 
distance  from  the  street  line.  Of  course,  this  would  not  prevent  the  projection  of  ordi- 
nary dormers  and  bay  windows  beyond  the  street  wall  as  allowed  in  the  Building  Code, 
nor  would  it  prevent  the  projection  of  wall  signs,  etc.,  provided  that  they  keep  within 
the  height  regulations.  The  street  wall  also  includes  the  front  walls  of  set-backs  as 
they  may  occur  above  the  height  limit  and  would  also  include  the  front  walls  of 
dormers,  towers  and  head-houses. 

The  street  line,  as  defined  here,  is  virtually  the  same  as  “ building  line  ” as  used 
in  the  Building  Code,  except  that  here  the  street  line  is  without  exception  the  line 
dividing  the  public  street  or  open  space  from  private  property. 

(e)  The  “ height  ” of  a street  wall  of  a building  is  the  vertical  distance 
measured  in  a straight  line  from  the  curb  level  to  the  highest  point  of  the 
roof  beams  adjacent  to  the  street  wall  in  the  case  of  flat  roofs,  and  to  the 
average  height  of  the  gable  in  the  case  of  roofs  having  a pitch  of  more 
than  20  degrees  with  a horizontal  plane.  Where  a building  comes  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Tenement  House  Law  the  definition  of  the  height  of  the 
building  and  of  the  curb  level  shall  be  as  defined  in  the  Tenement  House 
Law,  Article  1,  Section  2,  Subsection  12. 

Note. — The  height  of  a street  wall  is  the  same  as  defined  in  the  Building  Code. 
(See  Figure  1.) 

The  last  sentence  in  subsection  (e)  was  added  in  order  to  allow  nine  stories  to  be 
erected  in  the  90  feet  of  height  allowed  for  apartments  under  the  Tenement  House 
Law  on  the  60-foot  streets  of  the  city.  This  would  be  virtually  impossible  under  the 
definition  of  height  in  the  first  sentence  of  subsection  (e).  (See  Figure  2.) 

Parapets,  dormers,  head-houses,  towers,  roof  signs,  etc.,  may  be  excepted  from  the 
above  as  set  forth  in  the  exceptions  to  the  height  provisions  in  Section  8. 

(/)  The  “ width  of  the  street  ” is  the  average  width  of  the  street  within 
the  block  measured  from  street  line  to  opposite  street  line,  but  where  a 
street  borders  a public  place,  a public  park  or  body  of  water  the  width  of 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


53 


tlie  street  is  the  width  of  such  marginal  street  plus  the  width  of  such  public 
place,  public  park  or  body  of  water. 

Note. — If  two  sides  of  a street  are  not  parallel,  the  width  of  the  street  shall  be 
considered  to  be  the  average  width  of  the  street  within  the  block  but  there  will 


r—  parapet 


HCIS-MT 

OF 

STREET 

WALL 


^URB  LEVEL 


STREET 


■*-  parapet 

UNDERSIDE  OF  j 
ROOF  BEAAAS 

HEI' 

0 

TEN! 

HOI 

GHT 

>F 

E.AAENT 

JSE 

r ^URB  LEVEL 

1 

STREET 

Fig.  1 

Sect  ion  e 


Fig.  2 

Sect  to n 1-e 


undoubtedly  arise  exceptions  which  cannot  be  precisely  covered  by  any  wording  of  this 
definition.  In  such  cases  the  determination  of  the  exact  width  of  a street  within  a 
block  will  have  to  be  left  to  the  building  superintendent.  (See  Figure  3.) 

The  last  clause  was  put  in  so  as  to  allow  advantage  to  be  obtained  from  the  open 
spaces  of  parks,  etc.,  but  if  the  street  between  a building  and  the  park  or  waterfront  is 
100  feet  or  more  in  width,  no  exceptional  advantage  will  accrue  from  the  presence  of 
the  open  space  on  the  other  side  of  the  street. 


Section  1 —f 


(g)  A “corner  lot”  is  a lot  at  a corner  or  at  the  junction  of  two  or 
more  intersecting  streets  between  which  there  is  an  interior  angle  of  less 
than  135  degrees.  Where  a lot  is  on  a curve,  if  tangents  through  the 


54 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


extreme  points  of  the  street  line  of  such  lot  make  an  interior  angle  of  less 
than  135  degrees,  it  is  a corner  lot.  Any  other  lot  is  an  “ interior  lot.” 

Noth. — Where  a bend  in  a street,  even  though  it  is  not  at  the  junction  of  two  or 
more  streets,  makes  an  angle  of  more  than  45  degrees  in  its  change  of  direction  it  will 
create  a corner  lot  on  the  inner  side  of  its  angle.  There  can  be  only  one  corner  lot 
at  a corner.  (Sec  Figure  4.) 


ng.4 

Sect  ion 

(h)  A “ rear  yard  ” is  an  open,  unoccupied  space  on  the  same  lot  with 
a building  between  the  extreme  rear  line  o'f  the  building  and  the  rear  line 
of  the  lot.  In  the  case  of  a corner  lot  the  owner  may  elect  by' a statement 
on  his  plans  any  street  boundary  as  his  front.  The  rear  of  a lot  is  the  side 
opposite  to  the  street  front.  In  the  case  of  a triangular  or  gore  lot  the  rear 
is  the  boundary  line  not  bordering  on  a street.  The  depth  of  a lot  is  the 
average  distance  from  the  street  front  line  of  the  lot  to  the  rear  line  of  the 
lot. 

Note. — In  buildings  where  the  rear  yard  is  required  to  run  down  to  the  ground 
level  the  extreme  rear  line  of  the  building  would  be  taken  at  the  ground  level.  In  any 
other  building,  however,  it  would  be  taken  at  a point  18  feet  above  the  curb.  If  the 
rear  line  of  the  lot  is  irregular  or  is  not  parallel  with  the  rear  line  of  the  building  or 
with  the  street  the  average  distance  from  the  extreme  rear  of  the  building  to  the 
rear  line  of  the  lot  should  be  taken  in  computing  the  minimum  depth  of  the  rear  yard 
or  of  the  rear  court.  (See  Figure  5.) 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


55 


The  next  two  sentences  witli  regard  to  electing  on  tlie  plans  which  shall  he  the 
front  side  of  a building  and  thereby  determining  per  contra  which  side  shall  be  the 
rear  of  the  lot  is  taken  from  Mr.  Veiller’s  Model  Housing  Law  as  the  best  method  of 
determining  the  rear  line  of  buildings  for  the  purpose  of  determining  when  a building 
is  back  to  back  or  not  with  another  building.  The  front  of  a building  as  chosen 
for  this  purpose,  need  bear  no  relation  to  the  front  as  chosen  for  the  purpose  of 
determining  the  height  of  buildings  or  the  front  as  chosen  under  the  Tenement  House 
Law  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  location  of  rear  yards  under  that  law. 


Hg.  5 

Sec t i on  !■  h 

(i)  Buildings  or  portions  of  buildings  shall  be  deemed  “ back  to  back  ” 
when  they  are  on  opposite  sides  of  the  same  part  of  a rear  line  common  to 
each  and  the  streets  on  which  the  buildings  front  are  parallel  with  each 
other  or  make  an  angle  with  each  other  of  not  over  45  degrees. 

Note. — Buildings  on  the  corners  of  two  or  more  streets  and  interior  buildings 
fronting  on  the  narrow  ends  of  blocks  need  rarely  be  back  to  back  with  another  prop- 
erty. In  general,  it  is  the  buildings  in  the  middle  of  the  long  sides  of  blocks  that 
would  be  back  to  back  with  each  other.  The  common  rear  lot  line  does  not  have  to  be 
parallel  with  either  street  in  order  to  make  the  buildings  back  to  back.  (See  Section 
11a  for  diagrams.) 

(/)  A “ court  ” is  an  open,  unoccupied  space,  other  than  a yard,  o'n  the 
same  lot  with  a building.  A court  not  extending  to  the  street  or  a rear  yard 
of  at  least  the  prescribed  size  is  an  “ inner  court.”  Where  a building  is  not 
required  to  have  a rear  yard  under  Section  11,  a court  adjacent  to  the  rear 
lot  line  of  at  least  the  minimum  size  and  dimensions  at  any  height  prescribed 
for  an  inner  court  shall  be  deemed  to  be  a prescribed  rear  yard.  A court 
extending  to  the  street  or  a rear  yard  of  at  least  the  prescribed  size  is  an 
“ outer  court.”  An  outer  court  on  the  lot  line  extending  through  from  the 
street  to  a rear  yard  of  at  least  the  prescribed  size  is  a “ side  yard.” 


56 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Note. — The  definitions  of  courts  are  approximately  the  same  as  those  of  the 
Tenement  House  Law.  In  the  case  of  a building  that  is  not  required  to  have  a rear 
yard,  a yard  equal  in  size  to  that  of  an  inner  court,  will  be  accepted  for  the  purposes 
of  the  above  outer  court  and  side  yard  definitions.  (See  Figure  6.) 


STREET 


Fig.  6 
Sec  t i o n 1-j 


{k)  The  “height”  of  yards  and  courts  shall  be  measured  from  the 
lowest  part  of  such  yard  or  court  as  actually  constructed.  The  “ height  ” o.f 
yards  and  courts  for  all  buildings  that  come  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Tenement  House  Law  shall  be  measured  from  the  curb  level. 

Note. — The  height  of  yards  and  courts  will  as  a general  rule  be  measured  as 
they  are  in  the  Light  and  Ventilation  Article  of  the  Building  Code,  that  is,  from  the 
lowest  part  of  the  yard  or  court.  The  lowest  part  may  be  the  curb  level  or  it  may  be 
the  top  of  the  ground  story  or  it  may  be  higher  but  the  bottom  of  a prescribed  rear 
yard  cannot  be  higher  than  18  feet  above  the  curb. 

As  an  exception  to  the  above  general  rule,  for  all  buildings  that  are  subject  to 
the  provisions  of  the  Tenement  House  Law,  the  height  of  yards  and  courts  will  be 
measured  from  the  curb  level  even  though  the  yard  or  court  actually  starts  at  or 
above  the  second  floor  level. 

(/)  The  “least  horizontal  dimension”  of  a yard  or  court  at  any  level 
is  the  least  of  the  mean  clear  horizontal  dimensions  of  such  yard  or  court 
at  such  level, 

Note. — If  a court  or  yard  is  of  irregular  shape,  say,  for  example,  a trapezoid,  the 
mean  clear  horizontal  average  dimensions  in  each  direction  would  be  calculated  and 
the  lea§t  of  these  would  be  fhe  one  taken  for  the  purposes  of  this  resolution.  (See 
Figure  7.) 

:-G‘f  ■ - 

Articled — Use  Districts 

Section  2.  For  the  purpose  of  designating,  regulating  and  restricting 
the'  location  of  trades  and  industries  and  the  location  of  buildings  designed 
for  specified 'uses,  the  City  of  New  York  is  hereby  divided  into  four  classes 
of -districts : (1)  residence 'districts,  (2)  business  districts,  (3)  unrestricted 
districts  and  (4)  undetermined  districts, 'as  shown  on  the  use  district  maps 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


57 


which  accompany  this  resolution  and  are  hereby  declared  to  be  part  hereof. 
The  use  districts  described  on  said  maps  are  hereby  established. 

Sectioned.  All  buildings  or  premises  shall  conform  to  the  regulations 
and  restrictions  hereinafter  established  for  the  use  district  in  which  they 
are  located.  All  existing  buildings  or  premises  may  continue  in  their  present 
use  or  uses,  but  said  use  shall  not  hereafter  be  converted  or  changed  without 


conforming  to  the  regulatious  herein  established.  The  superintendent  of 
buildings  may,  however,  in  appropriate  cases  vary  the  application  of  the 
regulations  established  as  follows : 

Note. — It  is  intended  that  an  existing  factory  loft  building  which  would  find  itself 
in  a business  district  even  though  it  were  entirely  vacant  at  the  time  of  passage  of 
this  resolution,  if  it  were  obviously  designed  for  manufacturing,  should  be  allowed  to 
continue  in  that  use.  The  same  would  be  true  of  a building  for  which  plans  had  been 
filed  at  the  time  of  passage  of  this  resolution.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  intended  that 
a building  which  has  been  occupied  for  business  use  and  not  for  manufacturing  shall 
not  be  converted  to  industrial  use  where  it  happens  to  come  in  a business  district.  A 
private  house  could  be  altered  into  a club  house  or  boarding  house  within  a residence 
district,  but  not  into  a store  or  other  business  or  industrial  use. 

(a)  Permit  the  reconstruction  of  existing  buildings  or  the  erection  of 
additional  buildings  upon  a plot  exclusively  occupied  by  a single  trade, 
industry  or  use  existing  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  resolution  but  not 
conforming  to  the  uses  allowed  in  the  use  district  in  which  it  is  located. 

Note. — This  would  permit  an  industrial  or  business  plant  located  at  the  time  of 
passage  of  this  resolution  in  a business  or  even  a residence  district  to  continue  to  build 
on  additions  provided  that  such  extensions  do  not  constitute  an  extension  of  the  land 
area  occupied  and  provided  the  superintendent  of  buildings  is  convinced  that  they 
will  not  seriously  harm  the  neighborhood.  It  is  not  assumed,  for  example,  that 
under  this  provision  a one-store  garage  in  a residence  district  could  be  converted  into 
a three-story  garage  as  that  would  doubtless  be  a detriment  to  the  neighborhood. 

(b)  Where  a use  district  boundary  line  divides  a plot  in  a single  owner- 
ship at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  resolution,  permit  a use  authorized 
on  either  portion  of  such  plot  to  extend  to  the  entire  plot  but  not  more  than 


58 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


25  feet  lieyond  the  lioundary  line  of  the  district  in  which  such  use  is 
authorized. 

Note. — Where  the  influence  of  a business  district  designation  extends  back  for 
100  feet  and  only  100  feet  on  a side  residence  street  this  will  in  appropriate  cases  allow 
a man  who  owns  from  50  feet  from  the  corner  to  125  feet  from  the  corner  to  use  his 
whole  front  for  business  but  if  his  parcel  runs  to  150  feet  from  the  corner  the  last 
25  feet  will  have  to  be  used  for  residence  purposes.  The  same  will  be  true  with 
regard  to  the  depth  of  the  plot.  If  a lot  were  150  feet  deep  the  business  use  could  in 
appropriate  cases  go  back  125  feet  and  the  last  25  feet  would  be  residential.  The 
method  of  carrying  a business  use  back  further  still  into  a residence  district  is  shown 
in  the  next  subsection. 


(c)  Permit  the  extension  of  a single  building  back  into  a more  re- 
stricted district  under  such  conditions  as  will  safeguard  the  character  of  the 
more  restricted  district. 

Note. — Under  this  subsection  the  building  superintendent  could  in  appropriate 
cases  permit  a factory  building  to  run  well  back  into  a business  street  or  a department 
store  to  run  back  into  a residence  district,  provided,  for  example,  that  in  the  case  of 
the  factory  that  the  operatives  and  the  goods  came  and  went  by  entrances  within  the 
unrestricted  district  and  provided  that  in  the  latter  case  that  the  store  had  no  show 
windows  or  signs  or  entrance  within  the  residence  district.  Preventing  blocking  the 
side  residence  street  with  delivery  wagons  would  probably  be  a sufficent  cause  for 
refusing  such  an  extension.  Cases  of  the  above  could  extend  around  the  end  of  a 
block  or  through  the  middle  of  a block. 

(d)  Waive  the  residence  district  regulation  where  a residence  district 
has  a frontage  of  not  more  than  100  feet  on  either  or  both  sides  of  a street 
between  two  business  or  unrestricted  districts. 

Note. — As  the  district  designation  shown  in  a street  intersection  is  allowed  to 
extend  back  100  feet  along  a side  street,  if  a block  between  two  business  streets,  for 
example,  were  less  than  300  feet  long  there  is  often  little  object  in  trying  to  preserve 
the  middle  portion  for  residential  use.  However,  by  the  time  it  gets  to  be  over  100 
feet  there  is  enough  of  a nucleus  to  be  worth  preserving  for  residential  use.  (See 
Figure  8.) 


y- 

UJ 

UJ 

tr 

l- 

V) 


1 

i 

I 

i 

l- 

BUSINESS 

RESIDENCE 

■.BUSINESS 

u 

DISTRICT 

DISTRICT 

DISTRICT 

J 

UJ 

cc 

H 

1 ouu  ! 

RESIDENCE  STREET 


00 

ul 

— 1 00' > 

100’^ 

lOO'— ► 

vj 

V) 

Ul 

z 

j MAY  BE 

z 

BUSINESS 

BUSINESS 

in 

DISTRICT 

j MADE 

DISTRICT 

v> 

D 

CO 

jDUSINESS  j 

i 1 

1 

i 

(Q 

fig.  8 

Section  3-d 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


59 


{e)  Approve  in  undeveloped  sections  of  the  city  temporary  and  con- 
ditional permits  for  not  more  than  two  years  for  structures  and  uses  in  con- 
travention of  the  requirements  of  this  resolution. 

Note. — This  would  allow  a man  out  in  farther  Queens  in  the  midst  of  what  is 
shown  on  the  map  as  a future  residence  section  to  locate  a cement  block  making 
plant  or  a public  garage,  provided  that  he  would  remove  his  plant  at  the  end  of  two 
years  if  the  building  superintendent  thought  it  was  becoming  a nuisance. 

(/)  Where  the  street  layout  actually  on  the  ground  varies  from  the 
street  layout  shown  on  the  district  maps,  apply  the  designations  shown  on 
the  mapped  streets  to  the  unmapped  streets  in  such  a way  as  to  carry  out 
the  intent  and  purpose  of  the  plan  for  the  particular  section  in  c^uestion. 

Note. — There  are  many  cases  in  the  five  boroughs  where  the  mapped  streets  do 
not  follow  those  on  the  ground.  The  districting  plans  necessarily  had  to  be  shown 
on  an  official  map.  Eventually  either  the  streets  on  the  ground  will  be  changed  to 
conform  with  the  map  or  vice  versa.  In  the  meantime  the  building  superintendent  can 
interpret  the  maps  so  as  to  apply  their  intent  to  the  streets  on  the  ground.  It  seems 
desirable  for  the  future  that  whenever  the  Board  of  Estimate  is  considering  a topo- 
graphical map  change  that  will  affect  the  districting  maps  that  it  hold  a hearing  on 
both  changes  at  the  same  time. 

Section  4.  Residence  Districts:  In  a residence  district  only  buildings 

with  their  usual  accessories  designed  exclusively  for  the  following  specified 
uses  may  be  constructed: 

(1)  Dwellings,  which  shall  include  tenement  houses,  boarding  houses, 
and  hotels  having  thirty  or  more  sleeping  rooms. 

(2)  Private  clubs. 

(3)  Religious,  educational,  philanthropic  and  eleemosynary  buildings 
and  institutions,  other  than  correctional  institutions. 

(4)  Hospitals  and  sanitariums. 

(5)  Farming,  truck  gardening,  nurseries  or  greenhouses. 

In  a residence  district  the  use  of  buildings  or  premises  shall  be  limited 
to  the  uses  as  above  specified,  for  which  buildings  may  be  constructed  and 
to  the  customary  accessory  uses  incident  thereto.  The  superintendent  of 
buildings  may,  however,  permit  in  a residence  district  any  building  or  use 
in  keeping  with  the  uses  expressly  enumerated  above.  The  term  accessory 
use  shall  not  include  a business  or  a factory  nor  shall  it  include  any  build- 
ing or  use  not  located  on  the  same  plot  with  the  building  or  use  to  which 
it  is  accessory.  A private  garage  for  more  than  five  motor  vehicles  shall 
not  be  deemed  an  accessory  use.  A private  club  having  as  its  chief  activity 
a service  customarily  carried  on  as  a business  shall  be  excluded  from  a resi- 
dence district. 

Section  5.  Business  Districts  : In  a business  district  no  buildings  shall 

be  constructed  and  no  premises  or  buildings  shall  be  used  for  any  of  the 
following  specified  trades,  industries  or  uses : 

Ammonia,  chlorine  or  bleaching  powder  manufacture. 

Asphalt  manufacture  or  refining. 

Assaying  (other  than  gold  and  silver). 

Blacksmithing. 


60 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Boiler  making. 

Brewing  and  distilling  of  liquors. 

Carpet  cleaning. 

Celluloid  manufacture. 

Crematories. 

13istillation  of  coal,  wood  or  bones. 

Dyeing  and  dry  cleaning. 

Electric  central  station  power  plants. 

Fat  rendering. 

Fertilizer  manufacture. 

Garage  for  five  or  more  motor  vehicles. 

Gas  (illuminating  or  heating)  manufacture  and  storage. 

Glue,  size  and  gelatine  manufacture. 

Incineration  or  reduction  of  garbage,  offal,  dead  animals  or  refuse. 

Iron,  steel,  brass  and  copper  works. 

Junk  and  rag  storage  and  baling. 

Lamp  black  manufacture. 

Lime,  cement  and  plaster  of  paris  manufacture. 

Milk  bottling  or  distributing  station. 

Oil  cloth  or  linoleum  manufacture. 

Paint,  oil,  varnish  and  turpentine  manufacture. 

Petroleum  refining  or  storage. 

Printing  ink  manufacture. 

Raw  hides  and  skins — storage,  curing  and  tanning. 

Rubber  manufacture  from  the  crude  material. 

Saw  or  planing  mills. 

Shoddy  manufacture  and  wool  scouring. 

Slaughtering  of  animals. 

Smelting. 

Soap  manufacture. 

Stable  for  five  or  more  horses. 

Starch,  glucose  or  dextrine  manufacture. 

Stock  yards. 

Stone  and  monumental  works. 

Sugar  refining. 

Sulphurous,  sulphuric,  nitric  or  hydrochloric  acid  manufacture. 

Tallow,  grease  and  lard  manufacture  and  refining. 

Tar  distillation  or  manufacture. 

Tar  roofing  or  tar  waterproofing  manufacture. 

No  building  shall  be  erected  and  no  building  or  premises  shall  be  used 
for  any  trade  or  industry  that  is  noxious  or  ofifensive  by  reason  of  the 
emission  of  noise,  odor,  dust,  smoke  or  gas,  but  car  barns  or  places  of 
amusement  shall  not  be  excluded.  The  superintendent  of  buildings  may, 
however,  permit  the  erection  of  a garage  or  stable  in  a business  district  in 
any  portion  of  a street  between  two  intersecting  streets  in  which  there  ex- 
ists a public  garage  or  public  stable  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  reso- 
lution. The  use  of  buildings  or  premises  for  factory  purposes  shall  be 
prohibited  in  a business  district  except  that  25  per  cent  of  the  total  floor 
space  of  a building,  or  space  at  least  equal  to  the  ground  area  of  the  build- 
ing or  lot  may  be  so  used.  The  printing  of  a newspaper  shall  not  be 
deemed  a factory  use.  No  use  permitted  in  a residence  district  by  Section 
4 shall  be  excluded  from  a business  district. 


DISTRICTING  RKSOLUTION 


61 


Section  6.  Unrestricted  districts  and  nndetcrmined  districts : The 

terms  “ nnrestricted  district  ” and  “ nndeterniined  district  ” arc  used  to  des- 
ignate the  areas  for  which  no  restrictions  or  regulations  in  relation  to  the 
location  of  trades  and  industries  and  the  location  of  buildings  designed  for 
specified  uses  are  provided  by  this  resolution. 

Note. — The  difference  between  these  two  classes  is  explained  on  page  20. 

Article  II — Height  Districts 

Section  7.  For  the  purpose  of  regulating  and  restricting  the  height  of 
buildings,  the  City  of  New  York  is  hereby  divided  into  five  classes  of  dis- 
tricts, (a)  one-times  districts,  (b)  one  and  one-quarter  times  districts,  (c) 
one  and  one-half  times  districts,  (d)  two  times  districts,  (e)  two  and  one- 
half  times  districts,  as  shown  on  the  height  district  maps  which  accompany 
this  resolution  and  are  hereby  declared  to  be  part  hereof.  The  height  dis- 
tricts described  on  said  maps  are  hereby  established.  The  heights  of  build- 
ings hereafter  erected  shall  in  general  be  limited  with  relation  to  the  open 
spaces  on  which  they  face.  Except  as  hereinafter  provided,  every  building 
hereafter  erected  shall  be  so  constructed  that  the  street  wall  shall  not  ex- 
ceed in  height  the  limits  hereinafter  prescribed,  and  that  any  other  wall  or 
structure  or  any  part  of  such  building  or  any  structure  on  it  shall  not  ex- 
ceed the  set-back  and  other  provisions  hereinafter  prescribed. 

Note. — The  height  limits  as  proposed  would  affect  only  new  buildings  or  existing 
buildings  when  they  came  to  be  altered.  If  a roof  house,  or  a roof  sign  were  placed 
on  top  of  the  building,  it  would  have  to  conform  to  these  height  provisions.  The 
intent  of  these  provisions  is  to  keep  all  buildings  down  to  a height  that  will  allow  the 
greatest  amount  of  light  to  penetrate  into  the  street  and  into  the  lower  windows  of 
opposite  buildings  consistent  with  a reasonable  improvement  of  the  property.  On 
account  of  widely  different  local  conditions  in  New  York,  it  seemed  necessary  to 
have  five  classes,  as  shown  above. 

(a)  In  a one  times  district  no  building  shall  be  erected  on  the  street 
line  to  a height  in  excess  of  once  the  width  of  the  street.  Above  such  height 
limit  on  the  street  line  the  height  of  the  building  may  be  increased  provided 
that  such  extended  portion  sets  back  from  the  street  line  in  the  ratio  of  one 
foot  horizontally  for  each  two  feet  of  its  height  above  the  prescribed  height 
limit  on  the  street  line. 

(b)  In  a one  and  one-quarter  times  district  no  building  shall  be  erected 
on  the  street  line  to  a height  in  excess  of  one  and  one-quarter  times  the 
width  of  the  street.  Above  such  height  limit  on  the  street  line  the  height 
of  the  building  may  be  increased  provided  that  such  extended  portion  sets 
back  from  the  street  line  in  the  ratio  of  one  foot  horizontally  for  each  two 
and  one-half  feet  of  its  height  above  the  prescribed  height  limit. 

(c)  In  a one  and  one-half  times  district  no  building  shall  be  erected 
on  the  street  line  to  a height  in  excess  of  one  and  one-half  times  the  width 
of  the  street.  Above  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line  the  height  of  the 
building  may  be  increased  provided  that  such  extended  portion  sets  back 


62 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


from  the  street  line  in  the  ratio  of  one  foot  horizontally  for  each  three  feet 
of  its  height  above  the  prescribed  height  limit. 

{(i)  In  a two  times  district  no  building  shall  be  erected  on  the  street 
line  to  a height  in  excess  of  twice  the  width  of  the  street.  Above  the  height 
limit  on  the  street  line  the  height  of  the  building  may  be  increased  provided 
that  such  extended  portion  sets  back  from  the  street  line  in  the  ratio  of 
one  foot  horizontally  for  each  four  feet  of  its  height  above  the  prescribed 
height  limit. 

(c)  In  a two  and  one-half  times  district  no  building  shall  be  erected 
on  the  street  line  to  a height  in  excess  of  two  and  one-half  times  the  width 
of  the  street.  Above  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line,  the  height  of  the 
building  may  be  increased,  provided  that  such  extended  portion  sets  back 
from  the  street  line  in  the  ratio  of  one  foot  horizontally  for  each  five  feet 
of  its  height  above  the  prescribed  height  limit. 

CHART  SHOWING 
COMPLETE  CURVES 


]vjoTE. — Exactly  the  same  principles  apply  in  all  five  districts.  The  one  and  one-half 
times  district  is  chosen  for  illustrative  examples  merely  for  convenience.  The 
accompanying  diagram  (Figure  9)  shows  the  five  curves  of  limiting  heights. 

In  a one  and  one-half  times  district  the  height  of  all  buildings  would  be  made  to 
conform  approximately  to  that  now  provided  for  in  the  Tenement  House  Law.  How- 
ever, on  account  of  the  difference  in  definition  of  curb  level,  buildings  other  than  tene- 
ment houses  would  take  their  height  from  the  widest  street  and  not  from  the  street 
of  greatest  grade. 

A set  back  means  briefly  this,  that  if  an  owner  wishes  to  carry  a building  to  a 
greater  height  than  that  allowed  on  the  street  line  as,  for  example,  90  feet  on  a 60-foot 
street  in  a one  and  one-half  times  district,  he  can  add  on  an  upper  30  feet  provided  he  sets 
the  upper  30  feet  back  10  feet  from  the  street  line.  He  can  make  that  sH  back  right 
from  the  height  limit  in  the  form  of  a mansard  which  would  slope  back  m a ratio  of 
one  foot  horizontally  to  three  feet  vertically,  or  in  a set  back  of  three  and  one-third 
feet  for  each  of  three  stories,  or  in  a set  back  of  10  feet  for  the  whole  height  of  30 
feet;  then  he  can  set  back  again  above  the  top  of  this  set  back  provided  he  keeps  in 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


63 


the  same  set-back  plane.  In  general,  the  set  backs  are  determined  by  a line  drawn 
from  the  center  of  the  street  up  to  the  horizontal  line  in  the  street  wall  on  the  street 
line  at  the  level  of  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line  for  that  district  and  street.  (See 
Figures  10  and  11.)  In  the  street  in  question  this  horizontal  height  limit  line  would 


ri0.  12  - HEIGHT  LIMITS  - I'^TIMES  DISTRICTS 

* • *7  P/aiNC/PteS  APPLY  /NEACH  OP  THE 

6 C I 1 O n ( OTHEP  TYPES  OP  Pisre/crs. 


be  at  a level  of  90  feet.  These  two  lines  determine  a plane  which  might  be  called  a 
set-back  plane  and  no  portion  of  the  building  erected  above  the  height  limit  can 
project  in  front  of  this  set-back  plane  except  as  allowed  later  on  in  the  case  of  dormers, 
towers  or  parapets.  (See  Figure  12.) 


64 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Section  8.  ILxcejitions  for  all  Height  Districts:  (a)  In  computing 

the  height  limit  on  the  street  line,  a street  less  than  50  feet  wide  shall  be 
considered  as  though  it  were  50  feet  wide  and  every  street  or  public  open 
sj)ace  more  than  100  feet  wide  shall  be  considered  to  be  100  feet  wide. 

Note. — A building  may  go  just  as  high  under  this  resolution  on  a 30  or  35-foot 
street  as  it  may  on  a 50-foot  street  and  conversely,  a building  facing  on  a street  or 
park  or  open  space  more  than  100  feet  -wide  including  the  bordering  street  may  go 
no  higher  than  it  could  if  it  faced  on  a 100-foot  street.  The  first  exception  was 
made  to  prevent  working  a hardship  on  property  in  the  old  narrow  streets  of  the  city. 
With  a very  few  rare  exceptions  no  streets  are  being  laid  out  to-day  in  New  York 
City  less  than  50  feet  wide.  With  regard  to  the  latter  exception  it  was  felt  that 
buildings  facing  on  parks  or  open  spaces  might  be  allowed  to  go  a little  higher  than 
other  buildings  as  far  as  the  street  frontage  was  concerned  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
allowing  such  buildings  to  go  higher  would  correspondingly  interfere  with  the  light 
and  air  in  the  rear  and  side  windows  of  the  neighboring  properties  behind  and  on 
either  side  of  the  building  in  question  and  it  was  felt  that  this  disadvantage  more  than 
offset  any  exception  which  facing  on  the  park  might  lead  the  owner  to  expect  in 
the  way  of  additional  height. 


(h)  Along  a narrower  street  where  it  intersects  a wider  street,  any 
building  or  any  part  of  any  building  fronting  on  the  narrower  street  within 
a continuous  lOO^foot  belt  back  from  the  side  of  the  wider  street  shall 
follow  the  height  regulations  provided  for  the  wider  street.  For  each 
one  foot  by  which  such  narrower  street  exceeds  60  feet  in  width,  one  and 
one-half  feet  may  be  added  to  said  100-foot  belt. 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


65 


Note. — Any  building  or  any  part  of  a building  within  100  feet  of  a corner  regard- 
less of  whether  its  front  actually  turns  the  corner  or  not  and  regardless  of  whether 
the  lot  runs  through  to  the  wider  street  or  not,  may  take  advantage  of  the  height 
allowed  on  the  widest  of  the  streets  which  bound  it  at  the  corner.  This  would  mean 
that  on  a corner  of  a 100  and  a 60-foot  street  in  a one  and  one-half  times  district  that 
an  ofifice  building  or  an  apartment  house  might  carry  150  feet  of  height  on  the  street 
wall  back  100  feet  on  to  the  side  street  and  from  there  on  down  the  side  street  the 
street  wall  on  the  street  line  could  be  only  90  feet  in  height,  but  the  street  wall  might 
continue  on  up  to  150  feet  in  height  like  the  rest  of  the  building  provided  that 
the  upper  60  feet  set  back  20  feet  from  the  street  line  or  back  to  a second  line  of 
columns.  (See  Figure  13.)  It  is  imperative  that  height  limits  prescribed  for  the 
narrow  street,  especially  where  it  is  60  feet  or  less  in  width,  should  be  rigidly  observed 
more  than  100  feet  back  from  a wider  street  otherwise  the  whole  virtue  of  these 
restrictions  will  be  vitiated.  If  the  side  street  is  wider  than  60  feet  it  is  reasonable 
that  the  height  from  the  main  street’ should  carry  back  further  without  affecting  the 
light  down  the  block.  Thus  on  a 80-foot  side  street  the  150  feet  might  carry  back 
130  feet,  on  a 90-foot  street  145  feet,  etc. 

(c)  Above  the  height  limit  on  the  street  line  dormers  and  head-houses 
may  be  erected  on  the  street  line,  provided  that  their  aggregate  frontage 
length  on  such  street  line  be  not  greater  than  60  per  cent,  of  the  length  on 
such  street  frontage  of  the  plot  and  provided  that  such  percentage  shall 
be  reduced  by  one  for  every  foot  of  height  above  the  height  limit  on  the 
street  line,  and  provided  that  such  percentage  may  be  increased  by  one  at 
any  plane  parallel  with  the  street  frontage  for  each  four  inches  that  it  sets 
back  from  the  street  line. 


Note. — This  provision  allows  for  dormers  in  a mansard  roof  above  the  height 
limit  on  the  street  line.  It  would  permit  one  large  dormer  on  each  mansard  or  a 
number  of  small  dormers  on  each  mansard  provided  their  aggregate  frontage  did 
not  exceed  the  provisions  here  stated.  It  would  also  permit  elevator  headhouses 
on  or  near  the  street  line  and  permit  a tower  or  belfry  or  other  such  feature  to  be 


66 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


carried  up  on  the  street  line,  a feature  which  would  hardly  be  possible  under  Sub- 
section d,  except  on  a street  over  100  feet  wide.  It  would  also  give  more  latitude  in 
the  construction  of  a tower  at  the  street  line  under  rule  (d).  On  a lOO-foot  frontage 
this  dormer  provision  would  mean  that  the  dormer  on  the  street  line  at  the  height 
limit  could  be  60  feet  wide;  by  the  time  it  had  gone  up  10  feet  It  could  be  only 
50  feet  wide;  by  the  time  it  had  gone  up  30  feet  it  could  be  only  30  feet  wide,  and  by 
the  time  it  had  gone  up  60  feet  it  would  be  reduced  to  a point.  (See  Figure  14). 
It  also  means  that  if  it  set  back  five  feet  from  the  street  line  it  might  be  75  instead 
of  60  feet  wide  and  would  come  to  a point  at  75  feet  above  the  height  limit,  and  if  it 
were  back  13  feet  4 inches  it  might  cover  the  whole  frontage,  but  50  feet  above  the 
height  limit  it  could  be  only  50  feet  wide  at  the  front,  provided  this,  of  course,  would 
weave  in  with  the  set-back  provisions  and  whichever  was  the  less  drastic  in  any 
particular  case  would  govern.  (See  Figure  15.) 


id)  If  the  area  of  the  building  is  reduced  so  that  above  a certain 
level  it  covers  in  the  aggregate  not  to  exceed  25  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the 
lot,  the  street  wall  of  the  building  above  such  level  may  be  excepted  from 
the  foregoing  provisions,  and  the  street  wall  may  be  erected  to  any  height 
provided  that  such  wall  be  distant  at  all  points  at  least  75  feet  from  the 
center  of  the  street  on  which  it  faces ; but  for  each  one  per  cent,  of  its  full 
possible  length  that  such  street  wall  is  decreased,  such  wall  shall  be  per- 
mitted to  be  erected  four  inches  nearer  to  the  center  of  the  street. 

yioTE. — If  a street,  park  or  open  space  is  150  feet  or  more  in  clear  width  in  front 
of  a building,  a tower  may  be  built  directly  across  the  whole  front  of  the  building 
provided  it  does  not  cover  more  than  25  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot.  On  a 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


67 


Street  100  feet  wide  a tower  could  be  built  across  the  whole  front  of  the  building 
provided  it  set  back  25  feet  from  the  street  line  and  also  did  not  occupy  more  than 
25  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot.  If  the  building  were  200  feet  front  on  a 100-foot 


street,  a tower  with  a 50-foot  frontage  might  be  built  on  the  street  line  to  any  height 
and  then  splay  back  on  either  side  in  a ratio  of  one  foot  in  increased  width  parallel 
with  the  street  line  for  every  four  inches  back  from  the  street  line,  but  in  no  case 
could  a tower  occupy  more  than  25  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot. 


68 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


A tower  on  the  corner  of  a park  and  a 60-foot  street  could  rise  directly  on  the 
street  wall  on  the  park  side  but  would  have  to  set  back  45  feet  from  the  60-foot  street 
line.  If,  however,  its  frontage  on  a 60-foot  street  was  only  a quarter  of  such  street 
frontage,  the  tower  might  approach  within  20  feet  of  the  street  line.  The  increasing 
sizes  of  yards  and  courts  would  be  constantly  operative  and  it  would  be  necessary 
to  so  place  the  tower  that  the  yard  and  court  provisions  would  not  interfere  with 
it.  (See  Figures  16  to  21.) 

' (c)  When  there  are  existing  street  walls  in  excess  of- the  limiting 
heights  as  above  provided  within  50  feet  of  either  end  of  a street  wall  of 
a jiroposed  building  or  directly  opposite  such  wall  across  the  street,  the 
height  to  which  such  proposed  street  wall  may  rise  shall  be  increased  by 
an  amount  not  to  exceed  the  average  excess  height  of  the  existing  street 
walls  within  50  feet  on  either  side  and  directly  across  the  street.  The 
average  amount  of  such  excess  height  shall  be  computed  by  adding  together 
the  excess  heights  above  the  prescribed  height  limit  for  the  street  in  ques- 
tion, of  all  of  the  street  walls  of  the  existing  buildings  or  parts  of  existing 
buildings  within  the  above  defined  area,  and  dividing  the  sum  by  the  total 
number  of  buildings  within  such  area. 

Note. — Let  us  suppose  it  were  proposed  to  erect  a building  on  an  inside  lot 
on  a 50-foot  street  in  a two  and  one  half  times  district  and  a large  building  across 
the  street  was  525  feet  high,  an  existing  building  on  one  side  225  feet  high  and  one 
on  the  other  side  150  feet  high.  The  height  limit  on  the  street  would  be  125  feet 
normally.  All  three  of  these  surrounding  buildings  are  well  over  that  limit;  one 
of  them  by  400  feet;  one  by  100  feet,  and  one  by 25  feet,  or  a total  of  525  feet.  Dividing 
by  three  would  give  an  excess  average  height  of  175  feet,  therefore,  according  to 
this  provision,  the  proposed  building  might  rise  to  a height  of  125  plus  175  feet,  or 
300  feet.  If  at  some  future  time  the  225-foot  building  on  one  side  were  to  be  torn 
down  and  a new  building  erected  on  this  site,  the  new  building  could  use  the  300 
feet  of  the  first  new  building  in  computing  the  excess  height  to  which  it  might 
rise.  Existing  buildings  lower  than  the  height  limit  would  be  considered  in  this 
computation  as  though  they  were  at  the  height  limit.  If  within  50  feet  on  either 
side  and  directly  across  the  street  there  were,  for  example,  five  buildings,  only 
two  of  which  were  higher  than  the  height  limit,  the  excess  height  of  these  two 
buildings  would  be  divided  by  five  in  determining  the  excess  height  to  which  the 
proposed  buildings  might  go.  Buildings  directly  across  either  street  from  corner 
buildings  may  be  considered,  but  a building  diagonally  across  the  corner  could  not 
be  considered.  (See  Figures  22  and  23.) 


Existinq  Buildinq  525'  Hiqh 


35'  Street  m 2^  Times  District 
Normal  HeiqhtLimit=l25' 


Existinq 

B’ld'q. 

225’ 

tliqti 

Proposed 

Building 

Existing 

B’Id’q 

150^ 

High' 

Proposed  Buildinq  may  qo  to  300' 

Fi^.  E2 
5 ection  8- 

525' 
150 
225 
31900 
300 
125 
175'  = 
Extra  Height 


■ 90' 

160’ 

B’ld’g. 

B'Idq. 

60'  Street  in  2,Time5  District- 120'  Limit 


50' ► 

300’ 

Btd’q. 

60' 

Street 

Proposed 

Buildinq 

180’ 

Bld'g 

120' 

160 

180 

120 

t 

50' 

L 

100'  B’ld’g. 

300 
6l  loeo 
180 
120 
60'- 

200'  B’ld’g 

Proposed  Buildinq  may  qo  to  180' 


F.J23 

Secfion8-e 


j/o  <yjUA^JO 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


69 


(/)  Nothing  in  this  resolution  shall  prevent  the  projection  of  a cornice 
beyond  the  street  line  to  an  extent  not  exceeding  five  per  cent,  of  the  width 
of  the  street,  nor  prevent  the  erection  above  the  height  limit  on  the  street 
line  of  a parapet  wall  or  cornice  purely  for  ornament  and  without  windows 
extending  above  such  height  limit  not  to  exceed  five  per  cent,  of  the  latter. 
Where  a cornice  or  a parapet  occurs  on  a portion  of  the  street  wall  that  sets 
back  from  the  street  line,  the  mean  distance  that  such  portion  of  the  street 
wall  sets  back  from  the  street  line  may  be  added  to  the  width  of  the  street 
for  the  purpose  of  computing  the  projection  of  such  cornice  or  the  excess 
height  of  such  parapet.  The  provisions  of  this  resolution  as  to  height  shall 
not  apply  to  the  erection  of  church  spires,  belfries,  chimneys,  flues  or  gas- 
holders. 

Note. — If  a street  is  100  feet  wide  a cornice  might  project  five  feet.  If  the  street 
was  50  feet  wide  it  might  project  two  and  one-half  feet.  It  is  obvious  that  a parapet 
on  a set-back  portion  could  be  higher  than  on  the  street  wall.  A cornice  could 
project  its  full  five  per  cent,  in  front  of  the  parapet  wall  even  above  the  height 
limit.  If  on  a 100-foot  street  a building  or  the  upper  stories  of  the  building  set 
back  20  feet  from  the  street  line,  the  cornice  might  project  six  feet  in  front  of  such 
set  back  wall  at  the  height  limit.  (See  Figure  24.) 


CORNICES  AND  PARAPETS  IN  A 2 DISTRICT 

Fig.24  Section  8"f 


{g)  Where  more  restrictive  height  provisions  would  actually  be  opera- 
tive for  less  than  100  feet  along  a street  frontage  between  two'  less  restricted 
districts,  the  more  restrictive  of  the  two  latter  shall  control  over  such  inter- 
vening frontage. 

Note. — Where  a narrower  street  is  less  than  300  feet  long  between  two  wider 
streets  there  is  no  great  gain  to  the  side  street  in  stepping  down  to  the  lower  heights 


70 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


for  the  less  tlian  100  feet  of  frontage;  therefore  the  lower  of  the  two  end  street 
heights  is  allowed  to  carry  across.  (See  Figure  25.) 


(h)  Where  75  per  cent. ‘or  more  of  the  street  wall  of  a building  lies 
directly  opposite  to  the  end  of  an  intersecting  street,  the  height  regulations 
for  such  street  wall  shall  be  determined  from  the  average  clear  open  public 
space  in  front  of  such  75  per  cent,  or  more  of  such  street  wall. 

Note. — Where  a building  faces  directly  down  a street  it  is  reasonable  to  allow  it 
to  go  a little  higher.  (See  Figures  26  and  27.) 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


71 


(i)  Where  the  street  layout  actually  oii  the  ground  varies  from  the 
street  layout  as  shown  on  the  height  district  map,  the  designations  shown 
on  the  mapped  streets  shall  be  applied  by  the  building  superintendent  to  the 
unmapped  streets  in  such  a way  as  to  carry  out  the  intent  and  purpose  of 
the  plan  for  the  particular  section  in  question. 

Note. — See  Note  to  Section  3-f. 

Article  III — Area  Districts 

Section  9.  For  the  purpose  of  regulating  and  restricting  the  proportion 
of  the  lot  covered  by  buildings  hereafter  erected  and  the  area  and  dimensions 
of  yards  and  courts,  the  City  of  New  York  is  hereby  divided  into  five  classes 
of  area  districts.  A,  B,  C,  D and  E,  as  shown  on  the  area  district  maps 
which  accompany  this  resolution  and  are  hereby  declared  to  be  part  hereof. 
The  area  districts  described  on  said  maps  are  hereby  established.  The  pro- 
portion of  the  plot  covered  by  buildings  hereafter  erected  shall  be  regulated 
as  hereinafter  specified.  In  general  the  depths  of  yards  and  the  dimensions 
of  courts  shall  increase  proportionately  with  an  increased  height  of  the 
building,  and  the  minimum  depths  of  rear  yards  shall  be  proportionate  to 
the  depth  of  the  lot. 

Note. — It  is  the  intention  of  the  area  restrictions  to  prevent  a man  from  shutting 
off  or  decreasing  below  a reasonable  amount  the  access  of  light  and  air  to  windows 
in  neighboring  buildings,  especially  on  the  lower  stories.  It  would  also  provide  for 
reasonable  and  adequate  lighting  of  rooms  in  the  lower  stories  of  the  building  itself 
where  they  face  a yard  or  court.  Part  of  the  general  intent  is  to  provide  wherever 
possible  for  a common  yard  space  in  the  center  of  the  block  from  which  all  of  the 
abutting  buildings  could  draw  light  and  air. 

A Districts : For  all  buildings,  all  yards  and  courts  wherever  required 
shall  be  at  least  one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and 
for  each  one  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end. 

Note. — The  A districts  are  intended  to  make  it  possible  to  build  warehouses, 
storage  buildings,  grain  elevators,  cold  storage  plants,  etc.,  buildings  which  require  no 
light  or  ventilation  from  the  outside,  to  occupy  100  per  cent,  of  the  lot.  The  A 
districts  have  been  located  only  along  the  navigable  waterfront  and  along  certain 
freight  railways,  where  such  warehouse  buildings  would  be  most  likely  to  locate, 
and  also  where  such  buildings  would  have  the  least  harmful  effect  on  surrounding 
tenements  or  factories.  The  Light  and  Ventilation  ordinance  of  the  Board  of  Aider- 
men  provides  that  a court  for  the  lighting  and  ventilation  of  any  room  shall  have  a 
width  at  any  point  of  not  less  than  one  inch  for  every  foot  in  height,  and  is  retained 
when  such  dimension  is  not  less  than  one-twelfth  the  length  of  the  court,  otherwise 
the  latter  part  of  the  sentence  governs.  The  provisions  with  regard  to  the  length  of 
outer  courts  permit  approximately  the  same  length  of  court  in  proportion  to  width  as 
is  now  allowed  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  It  is  understood  that  any  tenement 
house  in  an  A district  would  have  to  conform  to  the  Tenement  House  Lav/  and  any 
buildings  other  than  warehouses  would  have  to  conform  to  the  Light  and  Ventilation 
ordinance  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen.  This  does  not  mean  that  buildings  which  cover 
100  per  cent,  of  their  lots  must  locate  exclusively  in  A districts.  In  the  B,  C and  D 
districts  which  are  defined  below,  a department  store,  for  example,  not  back  to  back 
with  another  building  and  with  no  rooms  which  would  have  to  face  on  a legal  court 
under  the  Light  and  Ventilation  ordinance  could  occupy  100  per  cent,  of  the  lot. 


72 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


B Districts:  For  all  buildings,  rear  yards  shall  be  at  least  two  inches 

in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height.  Outer  courts  and  side  yards 
shall  be  at  least  one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height. 


F1G.Z8^ECTI0N  ^ YARDS  AND  COURTS  FOR  EACH  DISTRICT. 


"A"  AND  "B'  Districts 
YARDS  2“  DEEP  FOR  EACH  FOOT  OF  HEIGHT. 
COURTS  r ..  ..  


YARDS  4"  DEEP  FOR  EACH  FOOT  OF  HEIGHT. 
COURTS  2"  . . . . , 


C MARTS  SHOW  APPROXIMATE  MINIMUM 
DEPTHS  OF  YARDS  AND  WIDTHS  OF  OUTER 
COURTS  AT  ANY  HEIGHT  OR  STORY  ABOVE 
THE  lowest  part  of  COURT  OR  YARD 


STORIES  ARE  ASSUMED  AS 
10'- 4"  HIGH  FLOOR  TO  FLOOR. 

THE  MINIMUM  DIMENSION 
OF  AN  INNER  COURT  IN  ANY 
CASE  WOULD  BE  ROUGHLY 
MIDWAY  BETWEEN  THAT 
FOR  AN  OUTER  COURT  AND 
THAT  FOR  A YARD. 


OUTER 


YARDS 


16^4 

1 5% 

I5W 

3/ 

14/ 

2/ 

13/ 

2^00' HI 

m 

23/ 

\C^J  Zl/ 

9/  le 

\/ 

71/  15V 

6V  12/ 

so’  HIGH 

510/ 

4/8/ 

EXISTING  TENEMENT 
HOUSE  LAW 


MINIMUM  DIMENSIONS 
"C  DISTRICTS 

YARDS  3"  DEEP  FOR  EACH  FOOT  OF  HEIGHT. 
COURTS  I't'  n « „ , „ 


!0%  or  depth  or  LOT 

IS  MINIIHUM  DEPTH  OF 
YARD  IN  ALL  DISTRICTS 
EXCEPT  THAT  n IS 
15%  IN  NOH^ resid- 
ential “E"  DISTRICTS, 
20%  IN  RESIDENTIAL 
"D"  DISTRICTS,  AND 
25  % IN  RESIDENTIAL 
'£"  DISTRICTS. 


YARDS  5*  DEEP  FOR  EACH  FOOT  OF  HEIGHT. 
COURTS  tl{  


q.B.F. 


Outer  courts  shall  be  at  least  one  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension  for 
each  one  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end. 

Note. — In  the  B districts  all  buildings  whether  stores,  offices,  factory  lofts,  hotels 
or  apartments  would  have  to  conform  to  the  above  provisions  with  regard  to  yards  and 
courts  which  are  apprixomately  the  same  as  those  required  by  the  Tenement  House 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


73 


Law  up  to  between  90  and  100  feet  in  height.  Above  that  height  yards  and  courts 
under  this  resolution  would  have  to  be  a little  larger  and  become  increasingly  larger  as 
the  building  went  up  in  height.  Where  a building  is  back  to  back  with  another  building 
a required  rear  yard  at  150  feet  in  height  would  have  to  be  25  feet  in  least  dimension; 
at  90  feet  in  height  it  would  have  to  be  15  feet  in  least  dimension,  all  heights  being  taken 


FIG.291SECTION  9.1c]  AREA-“B’-  DISTRICTS  - INTERIOR  LOTS 

//V  cod^ee  eu/LDiN63  y/*eps 


YAdps  AAfp  coi/ers  r dottco  l/nes 

PSCdEA3£P  IN  3/ ze  N£AdEd  THE  3A3E  SHOW  WHAT  IS 


from  the  curb  level  where  they  relate  to  tenements.  An  outer  court  at  150  feet  in  height 
at  the  top  would  have  to  be  12^  feet  in  least  dimension  if  more  than  eight  times  its 
width,  in  length,  it  would  have  to  be  widened  out  somewhat  at  the  open  end.  At  90  feet 
in  height,  such  outer  court  would  have  to  be  7^2  feet  in  width.  Inner  courts  would  be 


74 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


about  half  way  between  the  required  yard  and  the  outer  court  in  dimensions.  For 
example,  in  a building  150  feet  high,  an  inner  court  at  the  top  could  be  25  feet  square 
or  a little  less  than  18x36  feet;  at  90  feet  in  height  at  the  top  it  would  have  to  be 
15  feet  square  or  contain  225  square  feet,  provided  that  it  were  not  more  than  twice  as 

long  as  it  were  wide  for  that  area.  In  the  case  of  a building  which  was  not  back 


FIG. 30  (section  9.c)  AREA  “C‘  DISTRICTS 


Dotted  Lines 

SffQW  COVKTS 


to  back  with  another  building,  an  outer  court  could  use  the  minimum  provisions 
here  stated  for  outer  courts  only  in  case  the  rear  yard  on  which  it  opened  was  of  the 
dimensions  here  given  for  an  inner  court;  that  is  to  say,  at  150  feet  in  height,  25  feet 
square  or  18  x 36  feet,  or  with  dimensions  somewhere  between,  giving  an  area  of  625 
feet. 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


75 


C Districts : For  all'  buildings,  rear  yards  shall  be  at  least  three 

inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height.  Outer  courts  and 
side  yards  shall  be  at  least  one  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension  for 
each  one  foot  of  height.  Outer  courts  shall  be  at  least  one  and  one-half 


Fig;  31.  Section  9-d.  AREA “D”  DISTRICTS. 

MINIMUM  SIZES  OF  YARDS,  AND  OF  COURTS  IF  PROVIDED,  ARE  SHOWN 
BELOW.  THESE  ARE  NOT  INTENDED  AS  TYPICAL  PLANS  FOR  BUILDINGS. 

WHERE.  A 3U/LDIN6  OCCUPIES  MORE  THAN  60  PEP  CENT  OF  AN  INTERIOP  LOT 
OP  MOPE  THAN  80  PEP  CENT  OF  A CORNER  LOT  THE  SIZES  OF  YARDS  OP 
COURTS  OR  BOTH  MUST  BE  INCREASED  UNTIL  THE  PERCENTAGE  REQUIRE- 
MENTS APE  COMPLIED . WITH. 


ON  INTERIOR  LOT  ON  INTERIOR  LOT 


LENGTH  or  OUTER  COURT  IN 
EACH  CASE  IS  THE  MAXIMUM 
POSSIBLE  FOR  THE  MINIMUM 
PRESCRIBED  WIDTH. 


(F.3.F 


inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end. 
On  a plot  30  feet  or  less  in  average  width, ‘outer  courts  and  side  yards  shall 
be  not  less  than  one  inch  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and 


76 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


inner  courts  shall  be  not  less  than  two  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each 
one  foot  of  height  or  of  e(|uivalent  area  as  specified  in  Section  12b. 

Note. — in  a C district  the  prescribed  minimum  size  of  yards  and  courts  remains 
about  the  same  as  under  the  Tenement  House  Law  up  to  and  including  five  stories 
in  height.  Al)ove  that  height,  however,  they  gradually  become  more  stringent  than 
under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  In  a building  five  stories,  or  approximately  56  feet 
in  height,  a rear  yard  under  these  provisions  would  have  to  be  14  feet  wide  at  the  top 
or  two  feet  wider  than  required  under  the  Tenement  House  Law.  An  outer  court 
would  have  to  be  seven  feet  wide  or  one  foot  wider  than  required  under  the  Tenement 
House  Law.  An  inner  court  would  have  to  be  14  feet  square  or  a little  less  than 
10  X 20  feet  while  under  the  Tenement  House  Law  an  inner  court  on  the  lot  line 
would  have  to  l)e  12  x 24  feet  and  24  x 24  feet  where  completely  enclosed  by  the 
building.  However,  the  70  per  cent,  clause  in  the  Tenement  House  Law  is  very  apt 
to  require  increases  from  the  minimum  widths  and  depths  of  courts  and  yards  greater 
than  the  difference  between  this  resolution  and  the  Tenement  House  Law.  An  outer 
court  seven  feet  wide  could  be  almost  60  feet  long  before  it  would  have  to  be  widened 
out  at  its  extreme  end.  A special  exception  for  outer  and  inner  court  provisions  was 
made  in  lots  30  feet  or  less  in  width  on  account  of  the  extra  difficulties  of  planning' 
practicable  buildings  for  such  lots.  On  a lot  30  feet  or  less  in  width  an  outer  court  in  a 
building  five  stories  or  56  feet  high  need  not  be  more  than  four  feet  eight  inches  wide 
under  this  resolution,  although  under  the  Tenement  House  Law  it  would  have  to  be 
at  least  five  feet  wide.  For  a width  of  five  feet  it  could  be  40  feet  long,  but  if  it  were 
desired  to  make  the  outer  court  sixty  feet  long,  the  20  feet  nearest  the  open  end  would 
have  to  be  7j/2  feet  wide.  The  side  yard  of  such  building  need  not  be  over  four  feet 
eight  inches  wide  through  from  street  to  prescribed  rear  yard.  An  inner  court  in  such 
a building  under  this  resolution  might  be  about  6^2  x 13  feet,  although  under  the 
Tenement  House  Law  it  would  have  to  be  at  least  8 x 14  feet.  These  narrow  lots 
are  virtually  put  in  the  “ B ” districts  except  for  the  rear  yards. 

D Districts : The  area  of  a residential  building  shall  not  exceed  60  per 

cent,  of  the  area  of  an  interior  lot  or  80  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  a corner 
lot.  The  depth  of  a required  rear  yard  for  a residential  building  shall 
be  at  least  20  per  cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot,  but  in  no  case  need  it  exceed 
20  feet  at  the  base.  For  all  buildings  rear  yards  shall  be  at  least  four  inches 
in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and  courts  and  side  yards  at 
least  two  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height.  Outer 
courts  shall  be  at  least  two  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of 
length  from  the  closed  end.  On  a plot  30  feet  or  less  in  average  width  the 
least  horizontal  dimension  of  outer  courts  and  side  yards  shall  be  not  less 
than  one  and  one-half  inches  horizontally  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and 
outer  courts  shall  be  not  less  than  one  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension 
for  each  one  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end.  On  such  plots  inner  courts 
shall  be  not  less  than  three  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of 
height  or  of  equivalent  area  as  specified  in  Section  12b. 

Note. — The  D districts  are  intended  primarily  to  preserve  one  and  two  family 
house  districts,  especially  where  houses  occur  in  rows.  They  do  not  preclude  tenement 
houses.  They  do,  however,  demand  that  the  sizes  of  yards  and  courts  shall  be  about 
double  those  required  for  buildings  in  the  B districts.  A tenement  or  apartment  house 
on  an  interior  lot  in  a D district  covering  60  per  cent,  of  its  lot  and  four  stories  or  44 
feet  in  height  on  a lot  100  feet  deep  would  have  a rear  yard  20  feet  deep;  an  outer 
court  would  have  to  be  at  least  7 feet  4 inches  wide  and  not  over  44  feet  long  for  such 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


77 


width.  Jf  the  outer  court  were  longer  tlie  open  end  would  have  to  he  wider ; an  inner 
court  of  such  a building  could  he  14  feet  8 inches  square  or  about  lOy^  feet  x 21  feet. 
(See  Figure  31.)  In  the  case  of  a building  on  a plot  30  feet  or  less  in  width,  the  sizes 
of  outer  courts  and  side  yards  and  inner  courts  would  be  the  same  as  required  for 
buildings  on  plots  over  30  feet  wide  in  the  C districts.  In  the  case  of  a one  or  two 
family  house,  three  stories  or  approximately  34  feet  in  height,  the  rear  yard  would 
be  20  feet  deep ; an  outer  court  would  be  4 feet  3 inches  wide  and  a little  less  than  34 
feet  long  without  being  wider  at  its  open  end.  An  inner  court  would  be  8 feet  6 inches 
square  or  about  6 x 12  feet. 

E Districts : On  an  interior  lot  the  area  of  a residential  building  with 

its  porches,  wings  and  accessory  buildings  shall  not  exceed  at  the  curb  level, 
more  than  50  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot,  nor  on  a corner  lot  more  than 
70  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  the  lot,  and  above  a level  18  feet  above  the  curb, 
the  building  shall  not  exceed  30  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  an  interior  lot  or 
40  per  cent,  of  the  area  of  a corner  lot.  For  all  buildings  rear  yards  shall 
be  at  least  five  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each  one  foot  of  height  and 
courts  and  side  yards  at  least  two  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension 
tor  each  one  foot  of  height  except  that  on  lots  50  feet  or  less  in  average 
width  courts  and  side  yards  shall  be  at  least  two  inches  in  least  dimension 
for  each  one  foot  of  height.  For  a residential  building  the  depth  of  a re- 
quired rear  yard  shall  be  at  least  25  per  cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot  but  in 
no  case  need  it  exceed  25  feet  at  the  base.  For  a non-residential  building 
the  depth  of  a required  rear  yard  shall  be  at  least  15  per  cent,  of  the  depth 
of  the  lot,  but  it  need  not  exceed  15  feet  at  the  base.  On  at  least  one  side 
of  every  residential  building  there  shall  be  a side  yard  along  the  side  lot 
line  for  the  full  depth  of  the  lot  or  back  to  the  prescribed  rear  yard.  Outer 
courts  shall  be  at  least  two  and  one-half  inches  in  least  dimension  for  each 
one  foot  of  length  from  the  closed  end. 

Note. — The  E districts  are  intended  primarily  to  preserve  detached  and  semi- 
detached house  districts  with  light  and  air  on  all  sides  of  the  buildings.  In  most 
cases  an  E district  house  would  be  on  a lot  not  less  than  40  x 100  feet.  On  such  a 
lot  30  per  cent,  of  the  lot  area  above  the  ground  story  would  equal  1,200  square  feet, 
giving  a house  30  x 40  feet  in  size.  On  a lot  50  x lOO  feet  this  would  allow  1,500 

square  feet,  giving  a house  30  x 50  feet  in  size.  A rear  yard  for  such  a house  for 

lots  ICO  feet  deep  would  be  25  feet  deep  at  the  ground  story,  except  that  garages  and 
other  out  buildings  might  occupy  40  per  cent,  of  such  rear  yard  area,  and  in  an  ordinary 
2l4  story  house,  approximately  25  feet  high,  an  outer  court  or  side  yard  would  be  at 

least  5 feet  2^4  inches  wide.  Such  a side  yard  is  required  only  on  one  side  of  a 

house.  However,  if  a lot  is  50  feet  or  less  in  width,  a side  yard  of  this  sort  for  a 
story  house  could  be  reduced  to  4 feet  2 inches.  The  50  per  cent,  allowance  on  the 
ground  story  would  allow  for  one-story  wings,  bay  windows,  porches,  etc. 

In  the  case  of  a non-residential  building  on  a 100-foot  lot  the  rear  yard  would 
have  to  be  only  15  feet  deep  and  no  limitation  is  placed  on  the  percentage  of  the  lot 
which  the  building  may  cover.  The  court  provisions,  however,  remain  the  same.  It 
would  be  possible  to  build  an  apartment  house  in  an  E district  provided  it  conformed 
with  these  percentage  and  yard  and  court  requirements.  (See  Figure  32.) 

Section  10.  Percentage  of  Lot  Occupied:  (a)  Measurements  of  lot 
area  for  any  building  shall  not  include  any  portion  of  a street  or  alley. 
Any  part  of  the  area  of  a corner  lot  in  excess  of  5,000  square  feet  shall  be 


78 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


treated,  for  the  purpose  of  computing  the  percentage  of  the  lot  that  may 
be  occupied,  as  though  it  were  an  interior  lot. 

Note. — In  a D district  a building  on  a corner  lot  100  x 100  feet  could  occupy  80 
per  cent,  of  the  5,000  square  feet  on  the  corner  and  60  per  cent,  of  the  remaining  5,000 


Fig.3e SECTION  9,e.  AREA  - E - DISTRICTS 

THE  EXAMPLES  SHOWN  BELOW  ARE  POSSIBLE  TYPICAL  BUILDINGS 

PERCENTAGE  LIMITATIONS  APPLY  ONLY  IN  THE  CASE  OF  RESIDENTIAL 
BUILDINGS. 

HOUSES  IN  ROWS  CAN  NOT  BE  BUILT  AS  ALL  RESIDENTIAL  BUILDINGS 
MUST  KEEP  AWAY  FROM  AT  LEAST  ONE  SIDE  LOT  LINE. 


RESIDENTIAL  BUILDING  ON 
AN  INTERIOR  LOT 


LOT  - 5000  SQ.FT. 
H0USE=2500  SQ.FT. 

ON  GROUND  STORY 
HOUSE  - 1500  SO.  FT. 

ON  UPPER  STORIES 


NON- RESIDENTIAL  BUILDING 
ON  AN  INTERIOR  LOT 


NO 

PERCENTAGE 

RESTRICTION 


RESIDENTIAL  BUILDING 
ON  A CORNER  LOT 


LOT- 3000  SOFT. 
HOUSE-  3500  SO  FT. 

ON  GROUND  STORY 
HOUSE  - ZOOO  SQ.  FT. 
ON  UPPER  STORIES 


NON  RESIDENTIAL  BUILDING 
ON  A CORNER  LOT 


NO 

PERCENTAGE 

RESTRICTION 


6sr. 


square  feet  or  an  average  of  70  per  cent,  for  the  whole  plot.  If  the  actual  lot  on  the 
corner  contains  less  than  5,000  square  feet  the  adjoining  lots  if  not  corner  lots  them- 
selves would  be  considered  as  strictly  interior  lots  just  the  same. 

(b)  The  owner  or  owners  of  any  portion  of  a D district  may  by 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


79 


setting  aside  perpetually,  for  the  joint  recreational  use  of  the  residents  of 
such  portion,  an  area  equal  to  10  per  cent,  of  such  portion  in  addition  to 
all  other  yard  and  court  and  percentage  requirements  for  C districts,  have 
the  right  to  build  under  the  C district  regulations.  Such  joint  recreational 
space  must  be  at  least  40  feet  in  its  least  dimension  and  must  contain  at  least 
5,000  square  feet  and  must  be  approved  by  the  superintendent  of  buildings 
as  suitable  for  the  joint  recreational  use  of  such  residents.  Subject  to 
similar  regulations,  the  owners  of  any  portion  of  a C district  may  have  the 
right  to  build  under  the  B district  regulations. 

Note. — It  is  believed  that  the  recreational  problem  is  so  important  in  residential 
districts  that  it  is  worth  while  to  make  a concession  in  the  yard  and  court  provisions 
in  order  to  obtain  additional  space  for  playground  use  and,  therefore,  this  arrangement 
was  made  whereby  an  individual  developer  or  a group  of  property  owners  may,  by 
giving  up  10  per  cent,  additional  of  their  space,  be  relieved  from  the  yard  and  court 
requirements  of  the  district  in  which  they  are  located  and  follow  instead  the  yard  and 
court  requirements  of  the  next  less  restricted  district.  With  the  proviso  that  the  10 


ONE  PROPERTY  IN  "CDISTRICT 
JOXlOO  IN  PLAYGROUND  IN  ADDITION 
TO  "B"  DISTRICT  PROVISIONS. 


fi0.33  Sect  ion  lO'b 

per  cent,  must  equal  at  least  5,000  square  feet  it  is  obvious  that  the  plottage  which 
could  provide  this  space  would  have  to  be  at  least  50,000  square  feet  or  on  a block 
end  it  would  have  to  run  back  250  feet  into  the  block.  The  10  per  cent,  given  up  for 
recreational  use  might  be  provided  in  the  center  of  the  block  in  addition  to  the  required 
yard  space  or  it  might  be  in  any  lot  or  lots  running  through  to  any  bounding  street,  or 
it  might  be  on  an  adjoining  lot.  Of  course,  this  10  per  cent,  would  have  to  be  in  addi- 
tion to  any  yard  and  court  provisions  required  in  this  resolution  and  also  in  addition 
to  the  requirements  of  the  Tenement  House  Law  if  they  were  greater  than  those  in 
this  resolution.  (See  Figure  33.) 

Section  11.  Rear  Yards:  (a)  At  and  above  a level  18  feet  above  the 
curb  of  every  building  hereafter  constructed,  except  for  buildings  in  A 


80 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


districts,  there  shall  be  a rear  yard  opposite  every  part  of  a rear  wall  that 
is  55  feet  or  more  back  from  the  nearest  street  and  which  is  back  to  back 
with  a rear  portion,  more  than  55  feet  back  from  its  nearest  street,  of  any 


Figr.  34.  Section  II.  REAR  YARDS 

A REAR.  YARD  JS  REQUIRED  ONLY  BEHIND  THAT  PORTION  OF  A BUILDING 
THAT  IS  55  FEET  OR  MORE  BACK  FROM  THE  STREET  AND  BACK  TO  BACK 
WITH  A REAR  PORTION,  MORE  THAN  55  FEET  FROM  THE  NEAREST 
STREET,  OF  ANOTHER  BUILDING. 

THE  FRONT  OF  A CORNER  BUILDING  MAY  BE  ELECTED  BY  STATE- 
MENT ON  THE  PLANS  THE  REAR  IS  OPPOSITE  TO  THE  FRONT. 


STREET 

REAR  YARDS 


STREET 


I, 

b 

I? 

1 

REAR  YARDS 
STREET 


1 

REAR  YARDS 

AEOLIAN 

STERN’S 

FLEISCHMAN’S 
YARD  NOT' 

BUILDING 

REAR  YARD 

REAR  YARD 

REQUIRED 

REQUIRED 

1 

MOT 

REQUIRED 

NOT 

REQUIRED 

43“®  STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


STREET 


REAR  YARDS  '///y 

i 

REOU/eu.D  //// 

1 

iliii 

STREET 


q.B.F: 


other  property.  Within  55  feet  of  the  nearest  street  no  rear  yard  or  part 
of  a rear  yard  shall  be  required. 

Note. — In  this  rule  it  is  assumed  that  within  55  feet  of  a street  a building  can  be 
lighted  directly  from  the  street.  If  a block  is  110  feet  deep  through  from  street  to 
street  under  ordinary  conditions  it  would  hardly  be  necessary  or  practicable  to  demand 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


81 


rear  yards  but  when  the  block  becomes  deeper  than  that  rear  yards  become  more 
and  more  necessary.  (See  Figure  34.)  On  a lot  60  feet  deep  a rear  yard  would  be 
five  feet  deep;  on  a lot  65  feet  deep  in  an  A,  B or  C district,  for  example,  a rear  yard 
would  be  6 feet  6 inches  deep;  on  a lot  80  feet  deep  under  similar  conditions  a rear 
yard  would  be  8 feet  deep  and  so  on.  If  a block  were  200  feet  through  from  street 
to  street  and  two  lots  were  back  to  back  with  one  another,  one  of  them  50  feet  deep- 
and  the  other  150  feet  deep,  no  rear  yards  would  be  required  for  either  building  except 
that  the  building  on  the  lot  150  feet  deep  would  have  to  conform  to  subsection  d of 
this  same  section  according  to  which  such  a property  would  have  to  leave  unoccupied 
space  equivalent  to  what  it  would  have  to  leave  open  in  rear  yards  if  it  were  two 
separate  lots  for  which  rear  yards  were  required. 

(b)  In  the  case  of  a residential  building,  on  an  interior  lot,  a required 
rear  yard  shall  extend  for  its  full  area  down  to  the  curb  level,  except  that 
the  usual  accessory  buildings  not  over  18  feet  above  the  curb  may  cover 
not  over  40  per  cent,  of  the  prescribed  area  of  the  yard.  Except  as  other- 
wise provided  for  Districts  D and  E,  the  depth  of  a required  rear  yard  at 
its  lowest  level  shall  be  at  least  10  per  cent,  of  the  depth  of  the  lot,  but 
need  not  exceed  10  feet  at  such  level.  Any  portion  of  a required  depth 
of  a rear  yard  in  excess  of  10  feet  shall  not  be  required,  provided  that  an 
equivalent  depth  be  left  unoccupied  above  the  curb  level,  across  the  whole 
width  of  the  lot  between  the  street  line  and  the  street  wall  of  the  building. 

Note. — When  this  section  states  that  the  rear  yard  need  not  exceed  10  feet  at 
the  base  it  means  that  the  depth  of  10  feet  at  the  base  required  on  a lot  100  feet  in 
depth  need  not  be  exceeded  in  lots  of  greater  depth.  In  any  building  which  occurs 
in  a residence  district,  even  though  it  be  a church,  a club  or  a school,  a required  rear 
yard  would  have  to  run  down  to  the  ground  except  that  garages  and  other  out  build- 


100'  STREET 


ings  may  occupy  40  per  cent,  of  the  required  rear  yard  space  but  they  must  not  be- 
over  one  story  high.  In  D and  E districts  houses  often  set  back  from  the  street  line. 
Where  a lot  is  shallow  it  is  often  impracticable  to  leave  a 10  to  30-foot  setback  in  front 
and  at  the  same  time  a rear  yard  20  or  25  feet  deep.  To  remedy  this  it  is  proposed  to> 


82 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


allow  a man  to  liavc  a shallower  rear  yard  down  to  10  feet  provided  that  he  give  up 
a corresponding  front  yard  hack  of  his  street  line. 

(r)  When  a ])ropo.se(l  building  is  back  to  liack  with  an  existing  Intild- 
jng  or  laiildings  whose  rear  yards  are  less  tlian  those  recjuired  in  tliis  resolu- 
tion the  building  superintendent  may  allow  the  depth  of  the  rear  yard  in 
the  pro])Osed  building  to  he  not  less  than  the  average  depth  of  the  rear  yards 
.directly  in  the  rear,  hut  not  above  the  average  height  of  such  liuildings. 

Noth. — hi  various  instances,  particularly  in  Manhattan,  existing  loft,  warehouse 
.and  even  office  buildings,  have  been  erected,  sometimes  to  12  or  more  stories  in 
height,  with  rear  yards  considerably  less  in  depth  than  would  he  required  under  this 
resolution.  In  fairness  to  a person  who  would  erect  a new  building  back  to  back 
with  such  buildings  this  section  would  permit  him  to  make  his  rear  yard  about  the 
same  as  the  average  of  his  hack  to  back  neighbors’  yards.  In  determining  such  an 
average  of  hack  to  hack  yards  a rear  yard  as  large  or  greater  than  that  required 
under  this  resolution,  would  he  reckoned  as  though  it  were  of  the  size  here  required, 
in  determining  the  average.  Above  the  top  of  an  existing  building  its  rear  yard 
would  be  reckoned  as  though  it  were  of  the  required  size.  (See  Figure  35.) 

(d)  Where  a building  on  an  interior  lot  between  lots  for  which  rear 
yards  are  recjuired  runs  through  the  bloek  from  street  to  street  or  to  within 
55  feet  of  another  street,  it  shall  leave  unoccupied  at  any  height  above  the 
ground  story  an  area  at  least  equivalent  to  that  which  it  would  have  to 


STREEIT 


RZAR 
YARDS 


7777777777777;^^^^^ 

BUILDING 
ISO' HIGH 


I 


V, 


% 


J-t 


I 

REAR 

YARDS 


Fig.  36 
Sect  ion  tl'cl 
"B"  DISTRICT 

IF  TWO  SEPARATE 
BUILDINGS  BACK  TO 
- BACK,  VARD5W0ULD 
BE  Z5'  DEEP  EACH  A5 


SHOWN  BY  DOTTED 


7^ 


LINES 

80‘X  25’  = 2000  5Q.  TT. 
100“X20'  = 2000  SQ.FT. 


STREET 


leave  at  such  height  for  both  lots  in  case  it  were  two  separate  buildings  on 
separate  lots  back  to  back. 

Note. — Under  the  Tenement  House  Law  a building  which  runs  through  the  block 
'Or  from  street  to  street  not  on  a corner  has  to  be  built  around  a rear  yard  and  thus 
the  building  is  divided  in  two  entirely  separate  units.  In  many  non-residential  buildings 
this  is  impracticable  and  therefore  it  is  suggested  that  if  a building  runs  through 
ihe  block  from  street  to  street  it  contributes  to  the  common  light  and  air  of  the 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


83 


common  rear  yard  spaces  in  the  center  of  the  block  by  giving  up  an  uiroccupied 
space  above  the  ground  story  c(iual  in  area  to  the  two  back  to  back  rear  yards  that 
would  have  been  provided  in  case  the  plot  had  been  considered  as  two  separate  plots 
back  to  back,  (See  Figure  36.)  ‘ 

Section  12.  Courts:  (a)  In  every  building  hereafter  constructed  in 
which  a room  in  which  persons  live,  sleep,  work  or  congregate  receives  its 
light  and  air  in  whole  or  in  part  from  a court  or  yard,  at  least  one  court  or 
yard  having  a window  opening  from  such  room  s'hall  conform  to  the  require- 
ments of  this  resolution.  In  a required  court  or  side  yard  the  least  hori- 
zontal dimension  shall  be  not  less  than  four  feet. 

Note. — A room  which  is  lighted  and  ventilated  from  the  street  and  also  from  a 
court  or  yard  would  have  to  have  one  of  its  court  or  yard  windows  open  on  a court 
or  yard  of  the  sizes  herein  prescribed.  Any  room  which  was  lighted  or  ventilated 
entirely  from  yards  or  courts  would  have  to  open  on  at  least  one  of  the  prescribed 
size. 

(b)  When  a court  is  located  along  a side  of  a lot,  the  lot  line  shall  be 
deemed  an  enclosure  of  such  court.  \Miere  a court  opens  on  a street  or 
public  open  space,  such  street  or  public  open  space  may  be  considered  as 
part  of  that  court.  The  least  horizontal  dimension  of  an  inner  court  in  any 
given  district  at  any  height  above  the  curb  shall  be  not  less  than  that 


ST-REET 


STREET 


Court  A,  opening 
onstreet,  woulW 
often  be  too  narrow 
for  its  length,  unless 
part  of  street  area, 
as  shown  by  doffed 
lines,  is  included 


[ A J 

BUILDING- 


dfdg- 120' high 
ma"  6 "Dfstnei 


1 


400+ 

5q,FT 

B 


Z0'x20'=400sg.ff  , 

14. '2"jt 2B'4 400  sg  ft 


B=  Inner  Court  of 
eyui valent  area 


f 

R.EAR  VARD  20 


Fig:  37  Sec-tion  IZ-b  38  Section  iZ-b 

required  for  a yard,  in  inches  for  each  foot  of  height,  in  the  same  district 
at  the  same  height,  except  that  a court  of  equivalent  area  may  be  substituted 
for  such  required  court  provided  that  for  such  area  its  greatest  dimension 
be  not  more  than  twice  its  least  dimension.  Corners  of  prescribed  courts 
may  be  cut  off  provided  that  the  running  length  of  the  wall  at  the  angle  of 
the  court  does  not  exceed  seven  feet. 

Note. — No  outer  court,  inner  court  or  side  yard  on  the  lot  line  can  or  shovdd 
in  any  way  take  advantage  of  existing  courts  or  yards  on  neighboring  property 
because  there  is  no  guarantee  of  permanency  of  such  neighboring  yards  or  courts 
and  therefore  it  is  important  that  yards  and  courts  should  be  sufficient  to  take  care 
of  their  lot  without  being  dependent  on  their  neighbors.  A court  corner  may  be  cut 
off  at  an  agle  of  45  degrees,  for  example,  and  the  length  of  the  cue  may  be  as  long 
as  seven  feet,  in  conformity  with  the  practice  under  the  Tenement  House  Law. 


84 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


This  would  not  affect  the  size  of  yards  and  courts  l)ut  would  affect  the  remaining 
percentage  of  the  lot  occupied.  In  general  the  area  of  inner  courts  is  equal  to  the 
square  of  the  least  dimension  of  a required  rear  yard  at  the  same  distance  above  the 
ground.  It  is  or  would  he  the  square  of  the  least  dimension  in  inches  per  foot 
of  height  above  the  bottom  of  the  court  and  not  the  square  of  the  minimum  depth 
of  the  rear  yard  as  specified  in  terms  of  its  ratio  to  the  depth  of  the  lot.  This  would 
mean  that  in  B districts  with  a building  150  feet  high,  the  depth  of  a rear  yard 
could  be  25  feet  and  the  area  of  an  inner  court  would  be  25  x 25  feet  or  625  square  feet, 
hut  such  an  inner  court  would  not  have  to  he  square,  it  might  be  any  shape  provided 
that  it  was  not  more  than  twice  as  long  as  it  was  wide  for  such  625  square  feet.  After 
the  first  625  square  feet  were  satisfied,  however,  any  additions  might  be  made  to 
the  court  as  seemed  desirable.  A possible  equivalent  of  a court  25  feet  square  would 
be  one  a little  over  18  x 36  feet.  (See  Figure  38.) 

Section  13.  Exceptions  to  Yard  and  Court  Provisions;  (a)  Every 
part  of  a required  court  or  yard  shall  be  opened  from  its  lowest  point  to  the 
sky  unobstructed,  except  for  the  ordinary  projections  of  skylights  above 
the  bottom  of  such  court  or  yard  and  except  for  the  ordinary  projections 
of  window  sills,  belt  courses,  cornices  and  other  ornamental  features  to  the 
extent  of  not  more  than  four  inches.  Open  or  lattice  enclosed  iron  fire- 
escapes,  fireproof  outside  stairways  or  solid-floored  balconies  to  fire  towers 
projecting  into  the  yard  or  court  not  more  than  four  feet  may  be  located 
in  the  required  rear  yards  or  inner  courts  with  the  appoval  of  the  building 
superintendent. 

Note. — The  provisions  for  skylights  and  projections  beyond  the  walls  of  yards 
and  courts  follow  the  Building  Code.  The  provisions  with  regard  to  fire-escapes,, 
fireproof  outside  stairways  and  solid-floored  balconies  to  fire  towers  are  in  general 
the  rulings  of  the  Tenement  House  Department.  As  it  is  not  desiralde  that  fire-escapes, 
etc.  should  project  four  feet  into  an  outer  court  no  allowance  for  the  same,  is  made.- 

(b)  With  the  approval  of  the  building  superintendent  chimneys  or 
flues  may  be  erected  within  prescribed  yards  provided  they  do  not  exceed 
five  square  feet  in  area  and  do  not  obstruct  light  and  ventilation. 

Note. — It  is  most  important  that  flues  and  stacks  be  located  in  rear  yards  only  and 
there  only  where  they  will  do  the  least  harm.  In  no  case  should  such  stack  exceed 
five  square  feet  in  area, 

(r)  If  more  than  one  building  is  hereafter  placed  on  any  lot,  or,  if 
any  building  is  placed  on  the  same  lot  with  an  existing  building,  the  several 
buildings  may,  for  the  purposes  of  this  resolution,  be  considered  as  a single 
building.  Any  structure,  whether  independent  or  attached  to  a building,, 
shall,  for  the  purposes  of  this  resolution,  be  deemed  a building  or  a part 
of  a building.  If  two  or  more  buildings  are  erected  upon  contiguous  plots 
and  are  to  be  used  as  connected  parts  of  a single  establishment,  the  several 
buildings  shall  be  considered  as  parts  of  one  building  in  applying  the  pro- 
visions of  this  resolution.  If  one  or  more  buildings  not  fronting  on  a street 
are  erected  in  the  rear  of  another  building  fronting  on  the  same  street, 
and  are  to  be  used  as  connected  parts  of  a single  establishment,  the  several 
buildings  shall  be  considered  as  parts  of  one  building  in  applying  the,- 
provisions  of  this  resolution. 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


85 


Noth. — It  is  the  intent  of  this  section  that  all  structures  placed  on  one  plot  that 
are  in  any  way  related  to  one  another  shall  be  considered  as  parts  of  one  building  in 
determining  the  sizes  of  common  yards  and  courts.  Where  additions  are  made  to  an 
existing  plan,  even  though  they  may  be  on  separate  lots  adjacent  on  either  side  or  to 
the  rear,  it  is  highly  desirable  that  the  whole  plot  should  be  considered  as  a unit  in 
reckoning  the  distribution  and  sizes  of  yard  and  court  spaces. 

(d)  Where  the  street  layout  actually  on  the  ground  varies  from  the 
street  layout  as  shown  on  the  area  districting  map,  the  designations  shown 
on  the  mapped  streets  shall,  with  the  approval  of  the  building  superin- 
tendent, apply  to  the  unmapped  streets  in  such  a way  as  to  carry  out  the 
intent  and  purpose  of  the  plan  for  the  particular  section  in  question. 

Note. — See  the  same  section  for  Use  Districts,  Section  3,  f. 

{e)  Where  an  area  district  boundary  line  divides  a plot  in  a single 
ownership  at  the  time  of  passage  of  this  resolution,  the  area  regulations  for 
either  portion  of  the  lot  shall,  with  the  approval  of  the  building  superin- 
tendent, extend  to  the  entire  plot,  but  not  more  than  25  feet  beyond  the 
boundary  line  of  the  district  for  which  such  area  regulations  are  authorized. 

Note. — See  Notes  on  similar  section  for  use  districts.  Section  3,  b. 

(/)  With  the  approval  of  the  building  superintendent  a single  build- 
ing may  be  authorized  to  extend  back  into  a more  restricted  district  under 
such  conditions  as  will  safeguard  the  character  of  the  more  restricted 
district. 

Note. — See  Notes  on  similar  section  for  use  districts.  Section  3,  c. 

Article  IV — General  and  Administrative 

Section  14.  Existing  Buildings  and  Uses : Nothing  herein  contained 

shall  require  any  change  in  the  plans  or  construction  of  a building  or  in  its 
designated  use  for  which  a permit  has  been  heretofore  approved  or  plans 
for  which  are  on  file  with  the  building  superintendent  at  the  time  of  the 
passage  of  this  resolution  and  a permit  therefor  is  issued  within  three 
months  of  the  passage  of  this  resolution,  and  the  construction  of  which  is 
diligently  prosecuted  within  a year  of  the  date  of  such  permit,  and  at  least 
the  whole  ground  story  of  which  shall  have  been  completed  within  such 
year  and  the  complete  erection  of  the  building  as  planned  shall  have  been 
effected  within  five  years  from  the  date  of  passage  of  this  resolution. 

If  a structure  or  building  now  existing  shall  hereafter  be  wholly  or  in 
part  removed  or  destroyed,  whatsoever  may  be  the  cause,  purpose  or  manner 
of  its  removal  or  destruction,  it  shall  not  be  rebuilt  or  restored  unless  it 
conforms  with  the  provisions  herein  prescribed;  but,  except  as  otherwise 
provided  in  Section  3-a,  nothing  in  this  resolution  shall  prevent  the  restora- 
tion of  a building  or  industrial  plant  which  is  damaged  less  than  50  per 
cent,  of  its  structural  parts  or  the  restoration  of  a wall  declared  unsafe  by 
the  superintendent  of  buildings.  No  building  now  existing  or  hereafter 
erected  shall  be  so  altered  or  enlarged  as. to  bring  it  in  violation  of  any  of 
the  provisions  of  this  resolution,  nor  shall  any  lot  area  be  so  reduced  or 
diminished  that  the  unoccupied  areas  shall  be  less  than  required  by  this 


86 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


resolution.  When  additional  stories,  for  which  plans  have  not  been  filed 
at  the  time  of  passage  of  this  resolution,  are  added  in  the  future  to  existing 
buildings,  the  recpiirements  of  this  resolution  as  to  setbacks  shall  start  at 
the  top  of  the  existing  walls,  if  they  are  over  the  prescribed  height  limit,  and 
the  least  dimensions  of  yards  or  courts  shall  be  computed  from  the  top 
of  the  existing  yard  or  court  walls,  as  though  they  were  of  the  prescribed 
sizes  at  such  heights,  and  the  carrying  up  of  existing  elevator  and  stair 
enclosures  shall  be  exempted  from  such  provisions. 

Note. — This  resolution  will  not  affect  any  building  the  plans  for  which  have  been 
filed  at  the  time  of  passage  of  this  resolution.  However,  if  a building  is  torn  down 
it  could  be  rebuilt  only  under  the  terms  of  this  resolution  except  where  it  was  less  than 
half  destroyed  by  fire  or  otherwise  and  except  where  allowed  by  the  building  super- 
intendent under  Section  3a.  Once  a required  yard  or  court  space  for  a given  building 
has  been  determined  such  space  cannot  be  sold  but  must  remain  inalienably  dedicated 
to  the  exclusive  use  of  the  building  it  was  set  apart  for.  No  other  building  even  on 
the  same  lot  can  use  it  as  a part  of  its  required  yard  or  court  space. 

Where  within  a year  after  the  passage  of  this  resolution  and  the  receiving  of  a 
permit,  a building  has  been  completed  up  as  far  as  the  second  story  at  least  and  plans 
had  been  filed  previous  to  the  passage  of  this  resolution  for  a building  over  it  which 
would  be  beyond  anything  herein  permitted,  five  years  would  be  allowed  for  its  final 
completion  but  after  five  years  nothing  further  on  the  plans  could  be  built  except  in 
accordance  with  this  resolution. 

Whenever  in  the  future  stories  are  added  to  an  existing  building  the  tog  of  the 
existing  street  walls,  if  they  are  over  the  height  limit,  shall  be  taken  to  be  at  the 
height  limit,  for  the  purpose  of  computing  setbacks  and  the  existing  yards  and  courts 
shall  be  taken  to  be  of  the  prescribed  sizes,  even  though  they  may  be  less,  for  the 
purpose  of  continuing  up  the  yard  or  court  walls. 

Section  15.  Unlawful  Use;  Certificate  of  Occupancy:  It  shall  be 

unlawful  to  use  or  permit  the  use  of  any  building  or  premises  hereafter 
created,  erected,  altered,  changed  or  converted  wholly  or  partly  in  its  use 
until  a certificate  to  the  efifect  that  said  structure,  building,  premises  or 
places  and  the  use  thereof  conforms  to  all  of  the  requirements  of  this 
resolution  shall  have  been  issued  by  the  superintendent  of  buildings  of  the 
borough  in  which  said  building  or  premises  are  located.  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  the  superintendent  of  buildings  to  issue  a certificate  of  use  within 
20  days  after  a request  for  the  same  shall  be  filed  in  his  bureau  by  any 
owner  of  a structure,  building  or  premises  affected  by  this  resolution, 
provided  said  building  or  premises  conforms  with  all  the  requirements 
herein  set  forth.  It  is  provided,  however,  that  in  the  case  of  tenement 
houses  such  certificate  of  occupancy  shall  be  issued  by  the  tenement  house 
commissioner. 

Note. — This  certificate  of  occupancy  is  in  line  with  that  required  under  the  Build- 
ing Code,  but  for  the  purposes  of  this  resolution,  in  particular  the  enforcement  of  the 
“ use  district  ” regulations,  it  is  most  important  that  the  certificate  be  based  on  the  use 
definitions  and  classifications  of  this  resolution. 

Section  16.  Enforcement,  Legal  Procedure,  Penalties : This  resolution 
shall  be  enforced  by  the  tenement  house  commissioner,  the  fire  commissioner 
and  by  the  superintendent  of  buildings  in  each  borough  under  the  rules  and 


DISTRICTING  RESOLUTION 


87 


regulations  of  the  Board  of  Standards  and  Appeals.  The  superintendent  of 
buildings  shall  in  each  borough  enforce  the  provisions  herein  contained  in 
so  far  as  such  enforcement  can  be  effected  through  the  issue  of  the  building 
permit  and  the  certificate  of  occupancy.  The  fire  commissioner  shall  enforce 
the  provisions  herein  contained  in  so  far  as  they  relate  to  the  use  of  build- 
ings or  premises.  The  tenement  house  commissioner  shall,  subject  to  the 
rules  and  regulations  of  the  Board  of  Standards  and  Appeals,  have  exclusive 
jurisdiction  to  enforce  the  provisions  herein  contained  in  so  far  as  they  affect 
or  relate  to  tenement  houses.  Any  and  every  violation  of  the  provisions 
of  this  resolution  or  of  the  rules  and  regulations  adopted  thereunder  shall 
subject  the  owner,  agent,  contractor,  lessee  or  tenant  of  a building  or 
premises  where  such  violation  has  been  committed  or  shall  exist  and  the 
agent,  architect,  builder,  contractor,  or  any  other  person  who  has  assisted 
in  the  commission  of  such  violation  or  who  maintains  any  building  or 
premises  in  which  such  violation  exists  to  the  same  legal  procedure  and  the 
same  penalties  as  are  prescribed  in  any  law,  statute  or  ordinance  for  the 
violations  of  the  Building  Code,  and  such  violations  shall  be  subject  to  the 
same  legal  remedies  and  prosecuted  in  the  same  manner  prescribed  in  any 
law  or  ordinance  for  violations  of  said  Building  Code. 

Note. — The  building  superintendents,  the  fire  commissioner  and  the  tenement  house 
commissioner  each  will  enforce  that  which  is  assigned  to  his  jurisdiction  under  the  law. 
The  fire  commissioner  under  his  “ housekeeping  ” functions  would  enforce  the  “ use  ” 
provisions.  The  tenement  house  commissioner  would  enforce  everything  that  had  to 
do  with  tenement  houses,  but  wherever  the  provisions  of  this  resolution  were  more 
drastic  than  the  Tenement  House  Law  he  would  be  subject  in  his  enforcement  of  such 
provision  to  the  rules  of  the  Board  of  Standards  and  Appeals.  All  other  matters 
including  the  withholding  of  building  permits  or  certificates  of  occupancy  would  be 
under  the  building  superintendents  subject  to  the  control  of  the  Board  of  Standards 
and  Appeals  and  the  Board  of  Appeals. 

Section  17.  Rules  and  Regulations;  Modifications  of  Provisions:  The 
Board  of  Standards  and  Appeals  shall  adopt  from  time  to  time  such  rules  and 
regulations  as  they  deem  necessary  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this 
resolution.  Under  the  rules  and  regulations  prescribed  by  the  Board  of 
Standards  and  Appeals  the  application  in  a specific  case  of  the  provisions  of 
this  resolution  may  be  varied  in  harmony  with  its  general  purpose  and  intent. 
Where  by  the  terms  of  this  resolution  the  superintendent  of  buildings  may 
approve  certain  exceptions  to  the  general  provisions  of  this  resolution  such 
approval  shall  be  after  notice  and  hearing,  and  appropriate  conditions  and 
safeguards  may  be  attached  to  such  approval. 

Section  18.  Amendments,  Alterations  and  Changes  in  District  Lines ; 
Method  Provided : Whenever  the  owners  of  50  per  cent,  or  more  of  the 
frontage  in  any  district  or  part  thereof  shall  present  a petition  duly  signed 
and  acknowledged  to  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  requesting 
an  amendment,  supplement,  change  or  repeal  of  the  regulations  prescribed 
for  such  district  or  part  thereof,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  this  Board  to  vote 
upon  said  petition  within  90  days  after  the  filing  of  the  same  by  the  peti- 


88 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


lioiiers  with  llie  Secretary  of  this  Board.  If,  however,  a protest  against  such 
anicndment,  supplement  or  change  be  presented,  duly  signed  and  acknowl- 
edged by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent,  or  more  of  the  frontage  proposed  to  be 
altered,  or  by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent,  of  the  frontage  immediately  in  the 
rear  thereof,  or  by  the  owners  of  20  per  cent,  of  the  frontage  directly  oppo- 
site the  frontage  proposed  to  be  altered,  such  amendment  shall  not  be  passed 
except  by  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  Board. 

Note. — This  is  intended  as  a ready  method  of  changing  an  individual  block  front 
or  a small  district  from  business  to  residence  or  vice  versa  or  for  the  creation  of  new 
h2  districts.  However,  it  is  realized  that  in  ''any  case  districting  must  be  stable, 
otherwise  a man  will  never  know  what  to  count  on,  and  thus  will  be  as  badly  off  as 
with  no  districting;  therefore  it  is  provided  that  if  one-fifth  of  the  owners  affected 
object  to  a change  the  Board  of  Estimate  can  make  the  change  only  by  unanimous 
vote.  This  method  would  make  for  stability. 

Section  19.  Interpretation ; Purpose.  In  interpreting  and  applying  the 
provisions  of  this  resolution,  they  shall  be  held  to  be  the  minimum  require- 
ments adopted  for  the  promotion  of  the  public  health,  safety,  comfort,  con- 
venience and  general  welfare.  It  is  not  intended  by  this  resolution  to  interfere 
with  or  abrogate  or  annul  any  rules,  regulations  or  permits  previously  adopted 
or  issued  or  which  shall  be  adopted  or  issued  pursuant  to  law  by  the  Fire 
Department  or  Health  Department,  relating  to  the  use  of  buildings  or 
premises ; nor  is  it  intended  by  this  resolution  to  interfere  with  or  abrogate  or 
annul  any  easements,  covenants,  or  other  agreements  between  parties ; pro- 
vided, however,  that  where  this  resolution  imposes  a greater  restriction 
upon  the  use  of  buildings  or  premises  or  upon  height  of  buildings  or  requires 
larger  open  spaces  than  are  imposed  or  required  by  such  rules,  regulations  or 
permits  or  by  such  easements,  covenants  or  agreements,  the  provisions  of 
this  resolution  shall  control. 

Section  20.  Tenement  House  Law  to  Control  When:  Wherever  the 
provisions  of  this  resolution  require  larger  open  spaces  and  permit  less  height 
or  less  area  of  the  lot  to  be  covered  by  a building  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Tenement  House  Law  than  is  required  by  that  law,  this  resolution  shall 
govern,  but  wherever  the  provisions  of  the  Tenement  House  Law,  Chapter 
99  of  the  Laws  of  1909,  require  larger  open  spaces  and  permit  less  height 
or  less  area  of  the  lot  to  be  covered  by  a building  under  its  jurisdiction  than 
does  this  resolution,  the  Tenement  House  Law  shall  govern. 

Note. — An  amendment  to  the  Tenement  House  Law  which  went  into  effect  in 
April,  1916,  expresses  this  same  principle  from  the  standpoint  of  that  law.  It  reads 
as  follows : “ Wherever  the  provisions  of  any  local  ordinance  or  regulation  impose 
requirements  for  lower  height  of  building  or  a less  percentage  of  lot  that  may  be 
occupied  or  require  wider  or  larger  courts  or  deeper  yards,  the  provisions  of  such  local 
ordinance  or  regulation  shall  govern.  Where,  however,  the  provisions  of  this  chapter 
impose  requirements  for  lower  height  of  building  or  a less  percentage  of  the  lot  that 
may  be  occupied  or  require  wider  or  larger  courts  or  deeper  yards,  than  are  required 
by  such  local  odinance  or  regulation,  the  provisions  of  this  chapter  shall  govern." 

Section  21.  When  Effective:  This  resolution  shall  take  effect  imme- 
diately. 


APPENDIX  III— MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


Three  maps  are  submitted  accompanying  the  Final  Report  of  the  Com- 
mission; (1)  use  district  map;  (2)  height  district  map;  (3)  area  district  map. 
Each  of  the  above  maps  is  submitted  in  35  sections  covering  the  entire  city. 
The  35  sections  of  the  map  of  the  City  of  New  York  prepared  by  the  Chief 
Engineer  of  the  Board  of  Estimate,  under  the  direction  of  the  Board  have 
been  used  as  the  base  map  in  the  preparation  of  the  maps  herewith  sub- 
mitted. Each  sectional  map  must,  in  many  cases,  be  used  with  the  adjoin- 
ing sections  in  order  to  interpret  the  map  designations. 

1.  Use  District  Designations 


— I I — I I I 

Within  street 


Within  street 


On  side  of  street 


Wot  within  or  on  side  of  street 


Within  street 


Not  within  street 


On  side  of  street 


Residence  District 
Business  District 
Business  District 

Business  District 
Unrestricted  District 

Unrestricted  District 
Undetermined  District 


Not  on  Side  of  street 


Undetermined  District 


90 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


Use  District  Map  Designation  Rules 

(a)  Where  a use  district  designation  is  shown  within  a street,  any 
building  or  any  part  of  a building  within  a continuous  100  foot  belt  back 
from  each  side  of  the  street  or  portion  thereof  so  designated  shall  follow 
the  use  regulations  for  the  district  designated  within  the  street. 

Note. — The  use  district  maps  differ  from  the  height  and  area  district  maps  in 
that  on  the  latter  a heavy  black  line  in  a street  merely  marks  a boundary  line  between 
two  different  districts  which  are  actually  designated  by  figures  or  letters  within  the 
enclosed  areas,  while  on  the  use  district  maps  a heavy  black  line  in  the  street  indicates 
that  that  street  is  the  center  or  nucleus  of  a “ business  ” belt  whose  width  is  that  of 
the  street  plus  a hundred  feet  back  from  the  street  line  on  each  side.  Except  in  the 
exceptional  cases  which  are  noted  below  any  building  or  any  part  of  any  building 
which  is  built  within  this  belt  must  conform  to  the  provisions  for  business  districts. 
One  hundred  feet  was  chosen  as  the  right  distance  back  because  throughout  the  five 
boroughs  most  lots  are  approximately  100  feet  deep.  (See  Figure  50.) 


(b)  Where  a use  district  designation  is  shown  on  a side  of  a street  any 
building  or  any  part  of  a building  within  a continuous  100-foot  belt  back 
from  that  side  of  the  street  or  portion  thereof  so  designated  shall  follow 
the  use  regulations  for  the  district  designated  on  such  side  of  such  street 
whatever  may  be  the  designation  within  such  street  or  its  intersection 
with  other  streets. 

Note. — Oftentimes  it  is  desirable  to  designate  a different  use  for  the  two  opposite 
sides  of  a street.  In  such  case  each  side  is  taken  care  of  separately  by  making  the 


Fig  51.  Use-b 

use  designation  shown  on  one  side  of  the  street  control  everything  within  a belt 
100  feet  back  from  that  side  and  correspondingly  on  the  other  side  of  the  street. 
However,  showing  designations  on  the  side  of  the  street  leaves  the  middle  of  the  street 
blank.  As  a blank  designation  indicates  a residential  use,  ordinarily,  the  last  clause 


MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


91 


of  this  section  was  added  to  obviate  misunderstanding.  Likewise  in  an  irregular 
street  intersection  there  may  be  several  kinds  of  designations,  some  in  the  street 
and  some  on  the  side.  Again  the  last  clause  indicates  that  the  use  on  the  side 
of  any  street  entering  the  intersection,  controls  over  any  land  within  a 100  foot  belt 
directly  behind  it.  (See  Figure  51.) 

(c)  Where  a use  district  designation  is  shown  along  a bulkhead  line 
or  shore  line,  boundary  line  of  a county,  state,  city,  or  borough,  or  boundary 
line  of  a public  park,  reservation  or  cemetery,  any  building  or  part  of  a build- 
ing within  a continuous  100-foot  belt  back  from  that  side  of  such  desig- 
nated portion  of  such  boundry  line  shall  follow  the  use  regulations  for  the 
district  thus  designated. 

Note. — The  use  designations  are  shown  in  streets  wherever  there  are  streets  to 
show  them  in  but  to  prevent  confusion  and  misunderstanding  designations  are  also 
shown  along  many  other  boundary  lines.  If  it  were  not  for  this  a strict  interpretation 
of  the  rules  would  make  many  of  the  boundaries  along  bulkhead  lines,  etc.,  residential 
where  they  should  obviously  be  business  or  unrestricted.  (See  Figure  52.) 


Rd/lrodd 


Fig.  53  • Use  -d . 


(J)  Where  a use  district  designation  is  shown  along  the  side  of  a 
railroad,  any  building  or  part  of  a building  within  a continuous  100-foot  belt 
back  from  such  side  of  such  designated  portion  of  such  right  of  way  shall 
follow  the  use  regulations  for  the  district  thus  designated. 

Note. — The  way  the  base  maps  are  drawn  and  owing  to  the  varying  width  of 
railroad  rights  of  way  it  would  be  confusing  to  show  a use  designation  in  the  center 
of  a right  of  way  and  expect  it  to  govern  both  sides,  therefore  a designation  is  placed 
on  the  side  of  the  railroad  as  shown  to  govern  100  feet  back  from  the  right  of  way. 
On  account  of  the  often  irregular  edge  of  the  right  of  way  and  also  because  the 
borders  of  the  right  of  way  are  not  given  on  the  official  city  map,  it  is  stated  that  the 
designation  will  be  shown  along  the  side  of  the  railroad  but  the  100-foot  belt  would 
be  reckoned  from  the  edge  of  the  right  of  way.  (See  Figure  53.) 

(^)  Where  a single  use  district  designation  is  shown  within  a street 
intersection  or  public  open  place,  any  building  or  any  part  of  any  building 
within  both  of  any  two  continuous  100-foot  belts  back  from  any  streets 
adjacent  to  where  they  enter  the  intersection  or  place,  shall  follow  the  use 
regulations  for  the  district  shown  within  the  intersection  or  place  regardless 
of  any, designation  within  any  of  the  intersecting  streets  except  as  provided 
in  rule  h. 

Note. — If  one  and  only  one  use  designation  is  shown  within  a street  intersection 
it  is  intended  that  it  shall  govern  all  property  within  the  influence  of  the  intersection. 
To  accomplish  this  lOO-foot  belts  are  drawn  on  each  side  of  each  street  entering  the 
intersection.  These  belts  would  usually  cross  at  the  corners  leaving  what  is  usually 
a square  or  diamond-shaped  piece  common  to  both  belts  behind  each  corner.  This 
section  would  provide  that  any  building  or  part  of  a building  that  came  within  one  of 


92 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


these  spaces  should  follow  the  use  designation  shown  in  the  intersection  regardless  of 
the  designation  shown  in  the  approaching  streets.  (See  Figure  54.) 


(/)  Where  a use  district  designation  is  shown  in  an  intersection  where 
one  street  enters  but  does  not  cross  another,  any  building  or  any  part  of 
any  building  within  that  portion  of  a 100-foot  belt  back  from  the  unentered 
side  of  the  latter  street  and  directly  opposite  to  the  frontage  of  the  area 
governed  by  the  same  designation  on  the  entered  side  of  the  street  shall  fol- 
low the  use  regulations  for  the  district  shown  within  the  intersection,  except 
as  provided  in  rule  b. 

Note.— There  are  many  stub-end  streets  in  the  city,  streets  that  run  into  another 
street  and  stop.  As  the  above  rules  do  not  quite  cover  such  a case  this  rule  would 
provide  that  the  designation  shown  within  such  an  intersection  should  govern  all 
property  on  the  unbroken  side  of  the  street  that  comes  directly  opposite  the  ends  of 
tfie  two  100-foot  belts  on  either  side  of  the  entering  street.  (See  Figure  55.) 


{g)  Where  one  use  district  designation  is  shown  in  one  part  of  a street 
intersection  or  public  open  space  and  another  designation  is  shown  in  another 
part,  each  designation  shall  govern  as  provided  in  rule  e,  but  only  within 
those  blocks  actually  touched  by  such  designation. 

Note. — If  it  is  desired  to  show  different  uses  on  different  parts  of  a square  or 
intersection  it  can  be  done  by  showing  on  each  part  of  the  intersection  the  designation 
wanted  and  limiting  its  influence  to  the  block  or  blocks  actually  touched  by  it.  (See 
Figure  56.) 

{h)  Where  one  street  crosses  over  another  at  a different  level,  and 
the  use  district  designations  on  the  two  streets  are  different,  any  building 
or  any  part  of  any  building  within  a 100-foot  belt  back  from  each  side  of 
the  lower  street  shall  follow  the  use  regulations  for  the  district  designated 
within  the  lower  street,  but  if  it  is  a less  restrictive  use  than  that  designated 


MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


93 


within  the  street  at  the  upper  level  the  latter  shall  govern  exclusively  within 
100  feet  thereof  above  the  curb  level  of  the  upper  street. 

Note — There  are  many  cases  in  New  York  where  streets  cross  at  difYerent  levels. 
Often  one  of  the  streets,  usually  the  lower,  is  business  and  the  upper  residential.  It 
is  obvious  that  above  the  curb  level  of  the  upper  street,  the  upper  use  designation 
should  govern,  but  in  most  cases  there  is  no  reason  why  the  business  use  on  the  lower 
street  should  not  carry  through  at  the  lower  level  only.  (See  Figure  57.) 


Fig-.57  ' Use-h„ 

(f)  Where  a single  use  district  designation  completely  envelopes  an 
area,  any  building  or  any  part  of  a building  within  such  area,  except  where 
otherwise  specifically  designated,  shall  follow  the  use  regulations  for  the 
district  shown  by  the  enveloping  designation. 

Note.— Where  a block  is  so  deep  that  the  100-foot  belts  back  from  the  surrounding 
streets  do  not  meet  in  the  middle  of  the  block,  and  yet  the  belts  are  all  of  the  same 
use  designation,  the  unreached  space  in  the  middle  should  also  be  of  the  same  designa- 
tion. (See  Figure  58.) 


94 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


(j)  Where  any  part  of  an  area  bounded  by  two  or  more  kinds  of  use 
district  designations,  including  any  such  area  bounded  in  part  by  a bulkhead 
or  shore  line,  a boundary  line  of  a county,  state,  city  or  borough,  or  a 
boundary  line  of  a public  park,  reservation  or  cemetery,  is  not  governed  by 
any  of  these  rules  for  use  district  map  designations,  such  part  shall  be 


L 


STP££T 


Fig’.  58,  Use-i. 


governed,  except  where  otherwise  specifically  designated,  by  the  district 
designation  nearest  thereto. 

Note — If  in  the  middle  of  an  area  bounded  by  street  or  other  boundary  lines  there 
is  property  unreached  by  any  of  the  surrounding  100-foot  belts,  and  such  belts  are  not 
all  alike,  the  unreached  property  would  be  apportioned  among  the  bordering  uses 
according  to  which  use  any  particular  portion  of  the  property  was  nearest.  (See 
Figure  59.) 


Fig*.  59.  Use-j^ 


Industrial 


Residential 


Business 


(k)  Where  an  area  would  by  these  rules  for  use  district  map  desig- 
nations be  placed  in  two  or  more  districts  of  different  kinds,  the  least 
restrictive  designation  shall  govern  but  not  further  than  to  the  nearer  side 
of  the  first  street  within  which  a more  restrictive  district  designation  is 
shown. 

Note. — There  are  some  cases  that  are  not  covered  by  any  of  the  above  rules,  as 
for  example  property  in  the  middle  of  a block  less  than  200  feet  deep  between  a busi- 
ness street  and  a residence  street.  In  such  a case  the  business  use  would  govern  back 
for  100  feet  anyway,  even  though  the  streets  were  only  100  feet  apart,  but  if  it  came 
down  to  a case  where  the  100-foot  business  belt  would  reach  across  the  residence 


MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


95 


street,  the  property  across  the  residence  street  would  be  governed  only  by  the  resi- 
dence use  regulations.  (See  Figure  60.) 

(/)  The  residence  district  designation  is  used  within  street  lines  only. 
If  the  street  lines  are  dotted  they  do  not  constitute  a residence  district  desig- 
nation. Street  lines  included  within  the  boundaries  of  an  undetermined 
district  do  not  constitute  a residence  district  designation.  A blank  space 
within  a street  intersection  does  not  constitute  a residence  district  designation 


unless  it  occupies  the  entire  intersection  or  in  case  it  occupies  only  a part  of 
the  intersection  unless  a business  district  designation  occupies  the  remaining 
part  of  the  intersection. 

2.  Height  District  Map  Designations 

General  Designations 

1 = One  times  district. 

— One  and  one-quarter  times  district. 

= One  and  one-half  times  district. 

2 = Two  times  district. 

2^2  = Two  and  one-half  times  district. 

Height  District  Map  Designation  Rules 

(a)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  height  districts  is  shown 
within  a street  or  streets  or  a street  intersection,  any  building  or  any  part 
of  a building  within  a continuous  100-foot  belt  back  from  the  more  restricted 


96 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


side  of  the  boundary  line  street  or  streets  shall  follow  the  height  designations 
for  the  district  shown  on  the  less  restricted  side  of  the  boundary  line. 


/4//>r?es  c/zs/r/c/' 


(^/ess  res/r/c/ec/J 


T\rm 


U //^  f/mes 
1 

\B/c0 


y/s//mes 

Jf/mei 


/f/mes  cf/B/r/c/ 

^more  resZr/edeef  /OO  feeZ 

Fig  61.  Height— OL 


Note, — For  convenience  the  boundary  line  between  different  height  districts  are 
shown  on  the  maps  usually  in  the  middle  of  the  streets  although  it  is  felt  that  in  almost 
all  cases  both  sides  of  the  street  should  be  allowed  to  go  to  the  same  height.  There- 
fore when  a boundary  line  is  shown  in  the  middle  of  a street  it  means  that  the  actual 
boundary  line  of  the  less  restricted  district  is  100  feet  beyond  the  far  side  of  the 
bounding  street.  (See  Figure  61.) 


2 1 /me s d/strief 


\B/dj\ 

2 times 


/i  f/mes  d/s/r/c/ 


Fig.  62.  Height*-b 


(b)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  height  districts  is  shown 
on  the  side  of  a street  a building  fronting  on  that  side  of  the  street  shall 
follow  the  height  regulations  for  the  district  shown  back  from  that  side  of 
the  street. 


MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


97 


(c)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  height  districts  is  shown 
approximately  100  feet  back  from  the  side  of  a street  or  streets,  any  build- 
ing or  any  part  of  a building  within  a continuous  100-foot  belt  back  from 
that  side  of  the  street  or  streets  shall  follow  the  height  regulations  for  the 
district  within  which  the  street  or  streets  lie. 

Note. — In  special  cases  as,  for  example,  Fifth  avenue,  Manhattan,  which  is  a 
single  street  in  a one  and-quarter  times  district  surrounded’  by  one  and  one-half  and 
two  times  districts,  neither  of  the  above  rules  would  be  applicable  and  thus  it  is  neces- 
sary to  show  the  boundary  line  about  100  feet  back  from  the  street  line  in  order  tc 
indicate  that  both  sides  of  the  street  come  within  the  height  district  designated  for  the 
street.  (See  Figure  63.) 


(d)  Where  the  same  lot  or  portion  of  a lot  would  by  these  rules  for 
height  district  map  designations  be  placed  in  two  or  more  districts  of 
different  kinds,  the  least  restrictive  designation  shall  govern. 

Note. — Occasionally  cases  arise  where  the  same  property  would  come  within  two 
different  height  districts.  In  such  cases  the  less  stringent  would  govern.  (See  Figure 
64.) 


.Mg- 64-,  H eight -H, 


98 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


3.  Area  District  Map  Designations 

General  Designations 

A = A district. 

B = B district. 

C = C district. 

D = D district. 

E = E district. 

Area  District  Map  Designation  Rules 

(a)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  area  districts  is  shown 
within  a street  or  streets  or  a street  intersection  all  areas  within  a contin- 
uous 100-foot  belt  back  from  the  more  restricted  side  of  the  boundary  line 
street  or  streets  shall  follow  the  area  regulations  for  the  district  shown 
on  the  less  restricted  side  of  the  boundary  line. 

Note. — It  seemed  obvious  that  in  most  cases  both  sides  of  a street  should  be 
treated  alike  and  the  same  area  as  well  as  the  same  height  regulations  should  govern 
both  sides  of  the  street,  but  placing  the  actual  boundary  lines  of  districts  back  in  the 
middle  of  the  block  led  to  many  difficulties.  Therefore,  for  convenience,  they  were 
generally  placed  in  the  middle  of  the  street  with  the  understanding  that  the  actual 
influence  of  the  less  restricted  district  would  extend  to  a 100-foot  belt  beyond  the 
bounding  streets.  (See  Figure  65.) 


(b)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  area  districts  is  shown 
on  the  side  of  a street  all  areas  on  that  side  of  the  street  shall  follow  the 
area  regulations  for  the  district  shown  back  from  that  side  of  the  street. 

Note.— In  various  cases  both  sides  of  the  street  should  not  be  treated  alike  and 
buildings  should  be  allowed  larger  yards  and  courts  on  one  side  than  on  the  other. 
This  is  particularly  true  around  the  borders  of  the  warehouse  or  A districts  and  there- 
fore when  an  area  district  boundry  line  is  shown  on  the  side  of  a street  it  means  that 
the  middle  of  the  street  itself  is  the  actual  boundary  line  between  the  two  districts. 
(See  Figure  66.) 


MAP  DESIGNATIONS 


99 


(c)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  area  districts  is  shown 
approximately  100  feet  back  from  the  side  of  a street  or  streets  all  areas 
within  a continuous  100-foot  belt  back  from  that  side  of  the  street  or 
streets  shall  follow  the  area  regulations  for  the  district  within  which  the 
street  or  streets  lie. 


(d)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  area  districts  is  shown 
along  the  side  of  a railroad  that  side  of  the  right-of-way  of  such  railroad 
shall  be  the  division  line  separating  the  area  districts  on  either  side  of  such 
boundary  line. 


Fi^  68 


(e)  Where  a boundary  line  between  any  two  area  districts  is  shown 
and  dimensions  given  locating  it  from  recognized  lines  or  points,  the  area 
designations  on  either  side  shall  govern  up  to  such  located  boundary  line. 


100 


COMMISSION  ON  BUILDING  DISTRICTS 


(/)  Where  the  same  area  would  by  these  rules  for  area  district  map 
designations  be  placed  in  two  or  more  districts  of  different  kinds,  the  least 
restrictive  designation  shall  govern. 

Note — There  are  still  cases  likely  to  arise  in  which  the  same  property  would  he 
within  two  different  districts.  To  take  care  of  such  cases  the  general  rule  is  made 
that  the  area  regulations  of  the  less  restricted  district  shall  govern.  (See  Figure 
70.) 


SmEET 


